This is a really quick post. But something has just really been aggravating me lately. IT IS NOT PRO-LIFE, IT'S ANTI-CHOICE.
By saying one group is pro-life it's implying that the group that opposes their views (pro-choice) is against life. And that's just absurd. We are pro-choice so therefore we should be calling the other movement what it is: ANTI-CHOICE.
I can understand how some people who buy into the anti-choice rhetoric would go around saying they were pro-life...I mean it does sound better for them then saying they're anti-choice. But on this blog I would at least think most people here would know the difference and refer to them correctly.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: It's Not "Pro-Life" It's "Anti-Choice".
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/12900
Refering to each side as pro- keeps them even and equally valid. Just like you'd be annoyed if pro-lifers started calling you anti-life. The focus is on what each group is for, not against, and I think that's important.
But that is exactly my point jjgirl. They are implying that anyone that opposes their movement is against life just by calling themselves pro-life. It's insulting and wrong. And they ARE anti-choice. It's not rhetoric, it's the truth. They want to take choices away from women.
I totally agree. And as a sidenote, the newspaper I write for instructs us to use the terms "anti-abortion" and "pro-choice" for precisely that reason. And because not all pro-choice advocates are necessarily pro-abortion, they also instruct us to use the term "abortion rights advocates" for groups that oppose restrictions on them. With the exceptions of quoted material and proper names of groups, of course.
What is "pro-abortion?" I only see that phrase in anti-choice propaganda.
Before urging that we use the correct terms, we have to define the terms correctly. How many times have you read or heard "I'm pro-life, but I don't think abortion should be illegal"? That's because a lot of people who identify as pro-life believe it means being against the practice of abortion, not the legality of it. They don't realize that the debate is about abortion rights, not about whether they think abortion is right or wrong. They don't realize that you can be against abortion and pro-choice. Furthermore, most pro-lifers do not know much about anti-choice organizations. The truth is, the anti-choice organizations are REALLY anti-choice. Most of them do not support birth control and have backwards views about women. Regular people who are against abortion don't see that these organizations do not represent them. I hesitate to call these misguided people "anti-choice," because most of them aren't. The organizations know exactly what they're doing, so I either call them "anti-choice" or "pro-lie."
I was talking about political groups and the movement itself that calls itself "Pro-Life." Not the specific people that don't really know what the term means in total. Although I do agree with you that it is very important to educate them on what it means and that really what they are saying is that they're pro-choice.
No, that is rhetoric. Rhetoric is using language to persuade someone of your interpretation of truth. It's no more truth than pro-life, or pro-choice for that matter.
It's a descriptive name that we're applying to something, not an objective and unbiased description of truth. That's rhetoric.
I completely agree with jjgirl's response. I think it's important to keep both parties in the "pro" because it allows for some semblance of dialogue. I personally see "pro-life" as somewhat of a distortion, but I understand that some pro-lifers may see "pro-choice" as a distortion because they think "it's a child, not a choice." I think groups have a right to choose their own labels to a certain extent, and just as I resent being called pro-abortion, I would imagine pro-lifers resent being called anti-choice. In order to have any kind of open conversation about this subject, I think we need to be willing to engage with the other side, so to speak. And that means that pro-choicers have to allow pro-lifers their own terminology. After all, they are pro the life of the fetus, just maybe NOT pro the life of the mother. Just as we pro-choicers see a choice where others may not.
I completely agree with smerdmann. Calling the other side of the abortion debate "anti-" ANYTHING is going to turn them off and block the opportunity for meaningful conversation/debate.
I get the whole "anti-choice" thing, but the other side (and even those in the middle of the road) could just see that terminology as an unnecessary jab, even if we just consider it proper terminology.
This is exactly how I see it. "Anti-choice" is an unnecessary and inflammatory jab at them. They deserve respect even when they differ. They are not anti-choice in all matters, only in this one.
I don't know why we can't just say "pro-reproductive rights" and "anti-abortion rights". This is a fairly neutral description of both positions. It's not attacking anyone, and I think that's good. At this point in the debate, we need to seek points of common interest and not seek to attack or harm.
But anti-abortion rights doesn't encapsulate everything in the movement. If you honestly think that's everything the "pro-life" movement is against then you are living with blinders on. Now, if you wanted to say anti-reproductive rights that would be more on target and I could agree with that.
I agree with BackOfBusEleven.
The "technically correct" application of the term "pro life" is usually a stance that opposes any legalization of abortion.
But more and more, I'm seeing people using the term to reflect beliefs that we should focus our efforts on giving women as many other options as possible, while leaving abortion as a last resort, rather than "encouraging" abortions to happen, as they often interpret actions by pro-choicers.
Now obviously, these stances are still limiting on the choices that women will ultimately make, but they are not even in the same ballpark as anti-choice/pro-life organizations that really do try to prevent all abortions from being possible.
And I think it's important that while many of these people will advocate FOR increased education and funding for all of the "abortion alternatives", it seems that a good number of them are reluctant to actually take action AGAINST pro-choice causes. They like to get involved in discussions about how wrong they think abortion is, sure, but as far as actual instances of trying to criminalize abortion? Really, I see that side of it extremely rarely.
So whether or not this application of the term pro-life is technically correct, the fact that people use it in this in-between way makes it difficult to label ALL usage of the term as anti-choice.
But as BackofBusEleven said, we should ABSOLUTELY label as anti-choice any organizations that are trying to actually take rights away.
I'm pro-choice to the core, however, I think that calling it "pro-life" is not some huge affront. Abortion is still killing a potential life, which is what they want to emphasize over all else. I don't think it's necessarily misrepresentative given their aim.
I use the two terms interchangeably because I believe that it expresses more of the spectrum. A spectrum which is often ignored.
I'm also a large advocate for self-identification and expression. I'm fairly confident if people started calling me "anti-life" or some such nonsense, I'd be pretty pissed. I'm not against life. Many in the "anti-choice" movement believe there are other smarter choices, in their opinion, to make. Like abstinence.
Do I feel they're anti-choice? Yes, I do. I feel that eliminating a woman's right to exercise the rights of her own organs is criminal and an affront to any woman. But, I wouldn't go around labeling others like that. I think it's really effrontery to do that and I'd rather us be the compassionate seeming ones.
In the end, I think it'll land us in a better position to be compassionate than to be wing-nutty.
AND!!! (Grrr, this annoys me too) If you want the state to decide over peoples personal choices, moral decisions, lifestyles, health and whatnot, then DON'T CALL YOURSELF ANTI-BIG-GOVERNMENT. GRRR!! That is absolutist huge government - a government that infringes on the personal and moral sphere rather than sticking to justice and infrastructure. That's big government if anything is.
Sorry for the capital letters. I can't remain silent in real life either when I hear this. Just getting it off my chest... now I feel better :)
Personally, as someone who encounters people at different points on the anti-abortion spectrum all the time, I use both terms. "Pro-lifers," to me, are people who would never personally choose an abortion, but who believe in contraceptives and comprehensive sex ed and who would never harass a woman who did have an abortion. They are for the reduction in the number of abortions, but may not be against their legality. I have many friends on this side.
Meanwhile, anti-choicers are the people in the big "pro-life" organizations, the people protesting in front of clinics, the abstinence-only proponents, the people who run crisis pregnancy centers. They live to harass women. I have many enemies on this side.
""Pro-lifers," to me, are people who would never personally choose an abortion, but who believe in contraceptives and comprehensive sex ed and who would never harass a woman who did have an abortion. They are for the reduction in the number of abortions, but may not be against their legality."
I'm confused. How does these hypothetical "pro-life" people differ from pro-choice people who would not personally choose abortion (and may actually be a little disturbed by the thought of it), but support the use of birth control and sex ed, and believe that abortion should be legal?
The entire point of being "pro-choice" is that you believe that women should have all of the options available - carrying to term (keeping it or putting it up for adoption) or terminating, regardless of what your personal morals allow you to do yourself. The entire point of being "pro-life" is that you believe that women should not have the option of abortion.
It's really that simple.
I think this is an expression of the spectrum of believe regarding abortion and having to "choose a side of the fence" with your terminology. I have many "pro-life" friends and acquaintances who support varying degrees of legal abortion, but believe real sex education and a full discussion of options will help bring the number of abortions down to zero, their ultimate goal.
Pro-life can mean, simply, you're against the idea of abortion, not necessarily that you believe that abortion should be completely and utterly outlawed in all cases no matter what.
Yeah, I'm sorry but your first paragraph describes a pro-choice person.
All pro-choice means is that you wouldn't make abortion illegal. You don't have to like it or want to get one yourself. Its about allowing the CHOICE, not about which way you would choose.
Pro-life is a political label that means you want to make abortion illegal. Some people have slightly different stances-- some might allow exceptions for rape and others might not, for example-- but the defining characteristic is that they want to make abortion ILLEGAL for everyone else.
My SO and I had a conversation with some neighbors we are friends with that challenged my assumptions about what people mean when the self-identify as being pro-life.
The context (I feel like I'm bragging, but this is important) is that I am applying to volunteer at Planned Parenthood and I needed another reference for the application.
I initiated the conversation by asking the neighbors if they were pro-choice, on the assumption that someone who was not pro-choice would have a negative impression of PP. It turned out that they identify as pro-life, yet they have a positive impression of PP and would be comfortable being used for a reference. Perhaps I spend too much time reading of how the right-wing blogosphere demonizes PP, but this response was unexpected.
In retrospect I am wondering if the neighbors' definition of pro-life didn't match Genevieve's. I wish I'd thought to ask during the first conversation, because I feel like if I bring it up again I'll come across as hounding them over their views, but I'm really curious.
To the OP, I don't agree with your premise simply because I don't think there is any way for us to have a meaningful dialogue with pro-lifers if we can't even show them the basic respect of using the name they prefer. Of course, if you are only interested in attacking pro-lifers, it's a whole 'nother story. But IMO, it's more important to be able to talk reasonably to them (and possibly change some minds) than it is to scream at them and call them names. Even if that does feel good sometimes.
Right Feministing, because just as always yours is the only perspective a decent and intelligent human being could have. People who oppose abortion aren't balancing the life of the baby against the rights of the mother and coming to a different result than yours, they're fully aware that the baby's life has no value and are simply trying to deny women a choice for the hell of it.
Wow, which Right Wing site did you come from? Bother to read any of the comments much?
Can you quote something "Right Wing" I've said? I don't think abortion should be criminalized, but I don't sputter and drool with hatred for people who do so I'm Right Wing?
I understand those who disagree with me and respect your opinion. I understand those saying that it would be difficult to open a dialogue with anti-choicers when we are calling them by that name (although I don't think it's impossible). But I still think it's important, obviously, and will continue to call this group anti-choice. Pro-life, as I stated above, insinuates that the pro-choice movement is against life when that is not true. When feminists give in to this rhetoric I do not think it is helping our cause. The name itself promotes the idea that we are "baby killers" and things of that nature. Pro-life, as a movement, is anti-choice. They want to take the right to choose away from women.
But I second those people that have made comments about those people that call themselves pro-life when in fact all they are is not wanting an abortion for themselves but don't want to make abortion illegal...that's pro-choice. We should be educating those people that they are in fact pro-choice. Maybe they do not know what pro-choice means? I myself am one of those people but have always called myself pro-choice.
So would you be willing to have a respectful chat with someone who referred to you as a "baby killer" or "pro-abortionist"? I sure wouldn't. That's disrespectful as hell, and I certainly wouldn't get the impression that such a person was interested in hearing my point of view at all.
In the eyes of truly pro-life people (people who genuinely believe that an abortion is killing a real live baby, not just a cluster of cells or a fetus), we ARE anti-life because we support the murder of a certain group of people - the unborn. To them, it's not about choice, it's about murder. Most pro-lifers support both possible outcomes of carrying to term, so it isn't like they think women shouldn't have ANY choices, they just don't think that infanticide should be an option. And I can respect that. I sure can't agree with it, but I can respect that stance.
I truly think it depends on the way in which these things are said. Like during the presidential debates John McCain called it the pro-abortion movement (or something along those lines, I don't remember his exact wording). While yes I was offended I do think I would have been able to have a discussion with him about why that was not the correct term (just like what Obama did). When I say it's anti-choice I don't mean I want to yell and scream at them until they change their minds. That wouldn't be helpful no matter what language we used anyway. But in a debate setting if that was the term our side used and we explained our perspective and why it was what we used I don't think a conversation would be impossible.
Sorry if I'm misunderstanding you here, but are you saying that you would discuss with a pro-lifer why they were wrong to call you pro-abortion instead of pro-choice, as well as tell them that they were actually anti-choice, not pro-life? If I'm understanding you properly, it doesn't sound like you have much respect for the intelligence of people on the other side.
We're not going to win any points by being disrespectful jerks - isn't that exactly the thing that many of us get so upset about? Seeing pro-lifers blatantly disrespect the intelligence of women?