Monday, January 22, 2007

blog for choice day.

Blog for Choice Day - January 22, 2007

hopefully you all have read some of the great posts up around the blogosphere (yes, i just said "blogosphere" in seriousness - i should be fined by the hipster police, or something, because using that term without irony is like so five minutes ago, right? but anyway.) today, which is the 34th anniversary of Roe v. Wade and - not coincidentally - blog for choice day. so i would like to take a moment to do just that.

this is not going to be a long, in-depth, or necessarily well thought out post. i feel like jill's post over at feministe has got all three of those qualities covered. i really, really encourage you to click over and read it, because she somehow manages to cover almost every angle and every salient point about why being pro-choice is the only option for a rational, compassionate human being.

i also implore you to check out shakes's post, a more abbreviated offering, but one with a critically concise point: "I trust women, and the only question I have for someone who rejects choice is: Why don't you?"

this gets to the crux of the matter. society doesn't trust women. women are ignored, abused, infantilized, condescended to, shouted down, shamed, disavowed, discouraged and dismissed in so many ways, overt and insidious, every single day. women are not trusted with one of the most fundamental decisions of our lives, which is whether or not to bear children. why? because of fear. the fear of what we'll do with it. the fear of the power it gives us.

in all seriousness - i am for abortion on demand without apology. that sounds radical, but i don't believe it is, when you consider an ethos where women's full humanity is recognized and their capacity for making sound judgments is honored. if you believe a woman is a human being who has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, then you should support her ability to make the singular decision to carry a pregnancy to term and bear a child. the decision does not belong to the man who impregnated her. not to her parents. not to her employers. not to the church. not to the courts. not to anyone - anyone - except her.

anything less than such a singularity implies that she is not a whole person in and of herself, that she can be compromised, parceled out, "exception"ed, constricted, controlled. anything less says, your bodily integrity is subordinate to society's interests and ambitions, to the state's whim and fancy. anything less says, your personhood is subject to review.

the decision to have an abortion or to have a baby is a woman's decision to make, and her decision alone. that's why i'm pro-choice.


educand said...

Amen. Well said.

Anonymous said...

Growing up in an extremely "machista" society, and going to catholic school in high school and most of college, I was always defending my pro-choice stance. In high school I was put in the dominican version of detention for "ruining" my classmate's Pro-life presentation, with my inquiries and debating remarks.
Thanks for all the great links.

kate.d. said...

hey nadia, glad you liked the links. i enjoyed your perspective on "ruining" your classmate's presentation - the quotations lend it more of a "creatively re-interpreting" vibe :) hey, we've all got to fight the good fight, right?