Feminism. Defined in the Oxford dictionary as ‘The advocacy of women’s rights on the ground of the equality of the sexes.’
Explained in Wikipedia says as ‘… a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women….A feminist advocates or supports the rights and equality of women…Feminists have worked to protect women and girls.’
These definitions are hardly controversial and I would guess that most women nowadays consider themselves feminists, in so far as they believe women and men are of equal value and women should have equal rights and equality with men.
Unless the female is still in the womb. Then the more vocal feminists generally stay quiet, because the right to abortion on demand for women is under challenge. Because then a decision needs to be made between allowing abortion for any reason, as a woman’s choice, or limiting a women’s choice by preventing her from aborting a baby because she is a girl.
Feminists are torn between dislike at the patriarchal attitude implicit in the decision to abort a baby girl for gender reasons (sex selective abortion is sexist), while also supporting a woman’s right to choose and have control over her own body.
As Tom Chivers in the Telegraph says: ‘this is not a story which fits well with a narrative of ‘easily available abortion is an important public good”’.
The recent controversy in the UK over sex selection abortion (covered in other blogs, here and here) has brought this dilemma for feminists to the fore. It is now clear that we live in a country where girls, because of their sex, can be prevented from being born. Girls are killed in the womb here simply because of their unwanted sex. The implication being that it is OK if a girl is considered by a mother (or father) as being of less worth or value than a boy.
I would have expected that more feminists would stand up against this kind of injustice to their fellow females, but very few have. Most feminists remain silent and, in their silence, implicitly support the practice. Silence, however, implies that people are OK with sex-selective abortion.
Here is a typical comment on sex selective abortion, written by an American feminist, reflecting their dilemma:
‘Even though it pains me to think about it, I still can’t bring myself to say it should be illegal anywhere. I’m still a pro-choice person, and I’ve made a huge effort to not focus on why people are having abortions. I don’t feel like it is any of my business. That’s not to say that I don’t think the practice is problematic, because I certainly do.’
Sarah Ditum, writer and pro-abortion feminist, says in a Guardian piece that ‘It doesn’t matter why any woman wants to end her pregnancy. As the conscious and legally competent entity in the conception set-up, it’s the woman’s say that counts, and even the most terrible reason for having an abortion holds more sway than the best imaginable reason for compelling a woman to carry to term.’
Ditum goes on to argue that gendercide could actually be the preferred choice: ‘What about when a pregnant woman lives in a society that gives her real and considerable reason to fear having a girl?…In those situations, a woman wouldn’t just be justified in seeking sex selective abortion; she’d be thoroughly rational in doing so.’
Anne Furedi, Chief Executive of the British Pregnancy Advisory Service which performs 60,000 abortions a year, is equally adamant (and consistent) in her view that a woman’s right to abort is inviolable. She claims that those who call themselves pro-abortion, but who want to stop abortion on grounds of sex, are hindering the pro-choice movement as much as anti-abortion protesters who picket clinics: ‘We either support women’s capacity to decide, or we don’t…You can’t be pro-choice except when you don’t like the choice, because that’s not pro-choice at all.’
So pro-abortion feminists such as Ditum and Furedi in effect believe that the reasons behind abortion are irrelevant: it is the woman’s decision and reason that should take precedence, and if one accepts the premise that a woman has a ‘right to choose’ then who are we to judge her choices?
More commonly, others simply try to hide (rather uncomfortably) behind the false pretences of the mental health grounds of the 1967 Abortion Act and say that if having a girl would cause mental distress, she can be aborted.
This then enables the ongoing devaluation of women and the reinforcement of long-held, problematic gendered stereotypes, not just in this country but also in other countries.
So the modern day ‘feminist’ movement, in this case, is NOT about women’s rights, it’s about abortion rights, no matter what the reason or the stage of pregnancy.
Is it really possible to be a feminist and support the killing of your unborn sisters, simply because they happen to have been created female?
Surely it is more logical to be a pro-life feminist, as the organisation, Feminists for Life, so ably demonstrates. It simply means that gender equality starts before birth, not after.
NB. I cannot resist the opportunity to link to this amazing set of pictures of a baby in the womb. Take a moment to look at them, and when you do, note that this beautiful baby is female.
Posted by Philippa Taylor
CMF Head of Public Policy