(from the article "The Stealth 'Feminists' that Oppose Abortion")
Is a pro-choice stance necessary to calling oneself a feminist? Feminism is such a diverse collection of philosophies and beliefs that I don't think it's necessary to have any opinion about the right to obtain a legal abortion. There are so many things that (should) go into forming an opinion about abortion. For example:
- The fact that comprehensive sex education isn't being taught in schools, so at the beginning of their reproductive life spans, students are ill-informed about the alternatives to abortion. (Abstinence-only is the only sex ed that is funded and approved by the government, despite numerous studies that prove that unwanted pregnancy and abortion rates have risen since the abstinence-only was mandated.)
- Currently, abortion isn't available to all women because of financial and cultural restrictions. When you factor in lost pay, time off work, and/or daycare plus the cost of the procedure itself, abortion is cost-prohibitive for many of the nation's lowest income women. Additionally, most abortion clinics aren't prepared to deal with people from a non-English-speaking background, who are hearing-impaired or d/Deaf, or have other cultural particularities.
- The number of people seeking a child for adoption is far greater than the number of healthy white babies available for adoption. But the number of non-white babies and children over the age of two remains steadily high.
As a Catholic, I'm disheartened that "the last acceptable prejudice" is alive and well in the feminist community. Part of the anti-Catholic comments made in the article are based on the essential misunderstanding of Catholic doctrine. Say what you will, but the pro-life stance of the Church is at least consistent across all ages and circumstances. Yes, the Church asks women to carry the larger part of the burden when it comes to children, but "the bodiliness" of women isn't maligned. (In fact, if anything, the Church has strayed away from its Jewish roots, which really emphasized a woman's bodily uncleanliness. We don't have to have monthly mikvas any more, and there's no religious/cultural shunning of menstruation any more, either.)
One of the things that touches me most deeply about the Church is its long history of women's involvement. In the Church, I found a tradition of scholarship, of mysticism, of charity, and of ritual that filled in the missing pieces. I found a tradition where women were important to the life of the Church, as educators, as mothers, as mystics, and as saints. With the rich history of women in the Church, I can't believe that misogyny is as omnipresent in the Church as the article's author believes it is.
And for that, I am glad.
