Blogging for choice, post #2: Given the choice

January 22, 2007 at 11:57 am | In Blogroll, blogging for choice, the forg | 13 Comments

A few days ago I wrote about an ‘elective’ sterilization program being proposed by California’s Department of Rehabilitations and Correction. In that post, I linked to a series of posts by BrownFemiPower on the neglect of WOC (women of color) in conversations about reproductive health. Since she’s come home from the NAPW (National Advocates for Pregnant Women), she’s posted several more times on this issue. In one of these BFP provides an excerpt from Andrea Smith about Planned Parenthood’s less-known (and insupportable) agenda:

The prevalent ideology within the mainstream pro-choice movement is that women should have the “choice” to use whatever contraception they want. Yet, mainstream activists often do not consider that a choice among dangerous contraceptives is not much of a choice. In a study commisisoned in 1960, Planned Parenthood concluded that poor people “have too many children,” and something must be done to stop this trend in order to “disarm the population bomb.” Today, Planned Parenthood is particularly implicated in this movement, as can be seen by the groups it lists as its allies on its Web Site: Population Actional International, THe population INstitute, Zero Population Growth, and the Population Council. A central campagin of Planned Parenthood is to restore U.S> funding to the United Nations population Fund (UNFPA). In addition it asserts its commitment to addressing “rapid population growth.” As Hartmann documents, the UNFPA has long been involved in coercive contraceptive policies throughout the world. The Population Council assisted in MOrplant trails which were conducted without informed consent of participants in Bangladesh and other countries. In fact, trail adminstrators often refused to remove Norplant when requested. All fo these population organizations generally share the goal of promoting long-acting hormonal contraceptives of dubious saftey around the world. [From Andrea Smith, Conquest: Sexual Violence and American Indian Genocide. South End Press, Cambridge, MA, 2005 pg 99-105. This text was transcribed by BFP.]

I will admit to reading this and to not wanting to believe it, and to believing it all the same. Population control? Planned Parenthood? You betcha. We all know that some women’s choices ‘matter’ more than others, and that in many ways the pro-choice movement can gloss over certain examples of lack of choice:

  • “choice” pretends that all women are similarly making same choices and that all choices are *valued* by power structures.
  • “choice” used to promote violence against those who make “bad” choices–poor women who get pregnant *again* have made a bad choice and will have her benefits reduced.
  • “choice” pretends that all women are considered “legitimate” mothers and that the power structure values all women’s “choice” to become mothers.

[From a speech given by Rickie Solinger, transcribed by BFP.]

Because we can be pro-choice and still judge women who need abortions, can’t we? Let’s be real for a minute. When you hear about these women who have abortions ‘as birth control’, what kind of woman do you picture? Is she:

a) a woman of color

b) poor

c) uneducated

d) someone with a criminal background

e) all of the above?

Uh-huh. But the important thing is she’s treating that clinic like a revolving door. Right? Let’s throw the foetus out with the bathwater. And by foetus, I mean the circumstances that are getting this woman pregnant and bringing her to the clinic. Maybe twice. Maybe half a dozen times. (Although we all knows this woman is an anti-choice bogeyman chosen to shame any woman who has an abortion and make her worry that she might be lumped into that category.)

Now, just so we know I’m not making this all about the choice to have an abortion, and that choice only, what kind of woman do we picture who has a lot of children? Uh-oh. Do some of those above descriptors still fit? So maybe these women who can’t stop having babies or abortions (whether or not that is actually the case) are actually the best test subjects for new, experimental birth control. Right? I mean, it’s not like there’s no medical precedent for performing dubious medical tests and trials on the powerless. Tuskegee, anyone?

I understand every argument that presents the pro-choice movement as having a single-issue focus, because, just like mainstream feminism, the pro-choice movement mainly voices the needs and concerns of middle-class white heterosexual women. I am pro-choice, and this is what I want for my pro-choice movement:

This movement must be centered in the larger struggle for safe, available, affordable and legal medical treatment for all people.

I deserve access to an abortion just as my transgender friends deserve access to sex reassignment surgery just as my friends deserve access to cancer treatment (if you aren’t reading As the Tumor Turns, start now). How do we make medical treatment safe, available legal and affordable for all people?

We have to address issues of social inequality in our society that may seemingly have nothing to do with medical treatment. I am talking about political participation, I am talking about economic equity, I am talking about cultural competence, and I am not using these phrases as buzzwords. As progressive bloggers, we all work towards and support these goals, often through sharing information.

We have to recognize that there are charlatans and assholes out there who will provide misinformation and/or perform needed services without adequate training and supplies, and they will rob people worse than a Payday Loan store while placing their lives in danger. We have to expose ‘Crisis Pregnancy Centers’, we have to expose dangerous abortion doctors who prey on women’s lack of education, doctors who prescribe prescription drugs for money… so many more examples.

We have to look at the prison system, how we treat people who are incarcerated, and how we limit their options for reintegration. This includes needed medical treatment — and yes, this means mental health and substance abuse treatment — that most incarcerated individuals do not receive during or after time served.

We have to value people in our medical profession – not just doctors, but nurses, nurse practitioners, midwives, and nurse’s aides. These are the people who will be giving us the information we need, the thorough explanation the doctor is (all too often) too busy to provide.

It is overwhelming, all that we have to do. This is not nearly all that we have to do, but I want to write this down to show how my pro-choice movement can include the choices of all women – how it can give all women a choice. That is what I mean when I say ‘I am pro-choice’. That is what I want to work towards, and protect.

13 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

  1. [...] to other blogs writing on the topic here. You can also read some of my favorite posts on the topic here and [...]

    Pingback by Blogging for Choice « Ranting and Rejoicing — January 22, 2007 #

    Reply

  2. Living in the European country where there is the highest rate of teenage pregnancy, often leading to sheer poverty, endless misery and social hell, your words particularly touch me.
    As you say so rightly, women of all ages, races, countries, religious beliefs, should have the right to an appropriate, safe, human, and affordable (if not free) sexual education, information, councelling, and treatment.
    We cannot let those rights being threatened where they exist; we cannot accept those rights not being applied where they don’t exist.

    Comment by French Boo — January 22, 2007 #

    Reply

  3. stands up and claps. You know, we should start a movement petit. I’ve been sorta following all the different blog for choice day entries–and well, it’s getting crazy irritating reading over and over again the same ol’ rhetoric. The same ol’ rhetoric that never challenges itself, that never changes, that never dares to reach outside of the box created by anti-choice people that it’s in.

    It’s absolutly time to stretch, to bust the hell outta that box, to run free with imagination–if we can dream big enough for everybody, what’s the use of dreaming???

    yours,
    bfp

    and how we limit their options for reintegration.

    Comment by brownfemipower — January 22, 2007 #

    Reply

  4. [...] From Petit Blogging for choice pt 1 Blogging for Choice pt 2 [...]

    Pingback by Women of Color Blog » great, thought provoking posts — January 22, 2007 #

    Reply

  5. Hm. not sure what that mess of a comment above is–what’s that stuff after my name????? hahaha. anyway, the big edit I want to make is the part where i say “If we can dream big enough for everybody”–what I *meant* to say was if we “CAN”T” dream big enough for everybody!!!!

    Comment by brownfemipower — January 22, 2007 #

    Reply

  6. PP, see my post
    and

    I just wanna say, I think you’re really courageous for keeping yourself present in this thoughtful discussion as you always do, and I think the large-scale framing questions you’re writing around are really important ones to raise right now. Especially a structurally-attuned version of individual choice, which = big step back that makes it normative for everyone, whoever they are, to carefully examine where they’re coming from. I don’t want to see this subject become untouchable OR one that can’t be related to other complex, un-simplifiable social dimensions (**including religiosities** – this works from all angles; what frustrates me is how common monolithic-assumptions-about-religion-as-the-easy-mechanism-for-dismissal-of-the-topic are), and I really hope people keep talking productively.

    Comment by namaroopa — January 22, 2007 #

    Reply

  7. This is a great fucking post. Brava.

    I especially appreciate this: “Because we can be pro-choice and still judge women who need abortions, can’t we? Let’s be real for a minute…” Because, clearly, we can’t really be pro-choice while judging women who need abortions. Not one of us can afford to buy into or feed the ideological powerhouse that tells us we should judge women who need abortions, or that there are circumstances under which a woman should be denied health care, which should be a basic human right.

    Comment by Jane Awake — January 22, 2007 #

    Reply

  8. Also, petit, as I was reading the disturbing information about population control and its relationship to racism in this post, I realized something about my future. As you know, my partner is Hispanic and an immigrant. Americans would define him as a person of color. Compared to my family, both his immediate and especially his extended family are truly enormous (I recently read a statistic stating Hispanics, on average, have larger families and are procreating at a faster rate than other ethnic groups in the U.S.), and he has expressed sincere interest in having a large family with me as well. Why? In his words, “because I had a big family, and it was fun, and I want my kids to have the same kind of fun.” I’ve heard his sisters say similar things about wanting to have a lot of kids. And do you know what I’ve discovered? It is fun to hang out with his big family. There is always something to do, there are always birthday parties, there are mountains of gossip, hoards of cousins, lots of support, tons of food, etc., etc.
    .
    Now, I am very conscious not only of the fact that overpopulation is a huge issue on a planet where resources are necessarily limited, but also that the world is a really cruel and violent place. For these reasons, and others, I have a lot of contradictory thoughts about whether I would want to reproduce at all, and whether it is irresponsible for me to have more then one or two children. However, it never occurred to me before (what’s up, white privilege) that people exist in this country who would not want my partner and me to reproduce at all, much less to have a big family. I have always been very aware that there are many anti-choicers who would want to prevent me from having an abortion, or having too many abortions, but there are also those, who I would also refer to as anti-choice, would prevent me from giving birth, or giving birth too many times, because my partner is a person of color, or for any other reason. Or perhaps they wouldn’t mind after all, considering he and I are situated squarely on the path to becoming middle class. But then factor in that we are liberal, unmarried, occasional law-breakers and atheists, and we are totally screwed. OR, they hope, abstinent.
    .
    I absolutely agree that pro-choice needs to mean that women should have the right to choose safe abortion AND safe procreation. On a personal level, I worry a lot about the impact of population on our natural resources. However, I imagine the best way to deal with that problem is with technology, with innovation, with human creativity, rather than with the oppression of women.

    Comment by Jane Awake — January 22, 2007 #

    Reply

  9. [...] for a woman’s right to choose. My own personal favorite entries, up to now, have come from Truly Outrageous, Tomemos, and Jane Awake. There have also been excellent re-postings at Fetch Me My Axe and Women [...]

    Pingback by Questioning the Court: Roe v. Wade « The Kugelmass Episodes — January 22, 2007 #

    Reply

  10. More Blogging for Choice

    Blog for Choice day was a huge success – hundreds of pro-choice bloggers posted their thoughts on the importance of reproductive rights (according to the official Blog for Choice site, about 500 bloggers signed up on the official site, with more bloggers

    Trackback by the procrastinators handbook — January 23, 2007 #

    Reply

  11. Congrats on getting linked from feministing!

    Oh, and being a powerful, eloquent, kick-ass voice for every woman who wants freedom and sticking it to the white,middle-class, heteronormative “women’s” movment.

    Yeah!

    Comment by Aireanne — January 26, 2007 #

    Reply

  12. UNFPA is the United Nations Family Planning program. The so-called evidence that they participate in co-ercive contraception (in China, is the allegation) has been disproved several times.

    I don’t dispute that many mainstream pro-choice organizations focus on reproductive rights for middle-class white women, slandering UNFPA is silly. Their definition of family planning includes pre-natal medical care and support, making it easier for women to choose to have children.

    Comment by PurrpleGrrl — February 10, 2007 #

    Reply

  13. Hey PurpleGrrl, do you have some links/literature on this?

    Comment by petitpoussin — February 12, 2007 #

    Reply

Leave a comment

XHTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.