In our second round of essays on the 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade, contributors dig further into the discursive issues surrounding reproductive movements and the implications of political and policy legacies. Many thanks to our distinguished contributors:
Myra Marx Ferree, University of Wisconsin, (essay)
Jeanne Flavin, Fordham University, and
Lynn Paltrow, National Advocates for Pregnant Women (essay)
Drew Halfmann, University of California, Davis (essay)
Zakiya Luna, UC Berkeley (essay)
Several of the commentators on this blog have already raised the issue of how to get beyond the classic framing of “pro-choice” vs “pro-life,” even as others use these characterizations in their contributions as if they were neutral descriptions of the movements mobilized to fight over the legal status of abortion in the US. Joffe alone points out explicitly how misleading these labels are to characterize the movements, and uses the more accurate terms “abortion rights” and “anti-abortion” for the two sides.
But neutral and accurate are not the principles on which one would strategically decide what a movement should be called. Continue reading
As other contributors to this series have observed, “pro life” and “pro choice” do not adequately capture the dimensions and diversity of opinions and experiences that people have with regard to abortion and, as we will make clear, a whole lot more. Drawing upon our own observations formed during decades of gender scholarship and legal advocacy, we join others in their critique of the pro-life/pro-choice dichotomy. As part of that conversation, we offer “pro-lives” as a term that more accurately reflects the values of people on all sides of the abortion debate. Continue reading
The long-term consequences of reproductive movements post-Roe are varied, but one of the most important has been the coalescing of the movement for reproductive justice. When I first wrote about reproductive justice on this blog, the US was in the midst of a major political debate over who would be elected president. While the economy was a major focus, reproduction, once again, was a key issue raised. Republican candidates in races throughout the country took public stances including disagreeing with mandated health care coverage of birth control and made inaccurate and shocking remarks about social problems such as rape. Responses to these ideas sparked various resistances by individuals and organizations that mobilized celebrity support to “draw the line” on the War on Women as it became dubbed. Although these comments were not the only reasons for his re-election, President Obama remained in office. I wondered which candidate would talk about reproductive justice. The question I raised remains in some ways but now I pose it to fellow researchers of reproductive movements: who will talk about reproductive justice? Continue reading
Many of the essays in this Mobilizing Ideas dialogue examine the successes and failures of the abortion movements—arguing for example that the anti-abortion movement succeeded by co-opting discourses of “choice” and “women’s health,” organizing through churches, and pursuing incremental change, but was hurt by its violence, extremist rhetoric and attacks on contraception; while the abortion rights movement failed by focusing on “abortion rights” rather than “reproductive justice” and on defensive litigation.
Here, I’d like to highlight a few additional factors that helped determine the successes, failures, and strategic options of the abortion movements: the policy legacies of the Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood vs. Casey decisions, the relationship of the movements to political parties, and the electoral fortunes of those parties. Continue reading
Inspired by the recent 40th anniversary of Roe v. Wade and recent media reports of stronger support for legal abortions under all or most circumstances, we have asked scholars and activists to address the long-term trajectories of reproductive movements. How have the tactics and strategies of the movements changed over time? How has the framing shift from reproductive rights and health to reproductive justice affected who is getting involved in these issues now? What are the important changes in opportunities, resources, demographics, etc., and how have the movements failed or succeeded in addressing these changes? Contributors have situated responses to these questions within the larger topic of long-term movement trajectories. We are posting 9 great contributions now and several more later this month. Many thanks to our all-star cast of contributors (below) and to Zakiya Luna, Kristin Luker, and Jill Adams for helpful insights during the planning stages of this essay dialogue.
Erika Bachiochi, Pro-Life Author and Speaker (essay)
Alison Dahl Crossley, UC Santa Barbara (essay)
Michelle Dillon, University of New Hampshire (essay)
Sujatha Jesudason, CoreAlign, UC San Francisco (essay)
Carole Joffe, UC San Francisco (essay)
Robin Marty and Jessica Mason Pieklo, RH Reality Check (essay)
Ziad Munson, Lehigh University (essay)
Jon O’Brien, Catholics for Choice (essay)
Deana Rohlinger, Florida State University (essay)
As always, we invite you to join the dialogue by posting your reactions to these essays in the comments sections.
Editors in Chief,
Grace Yukich, David Ortiz, Rory McVeigh, and Dan Myers
Last month, Time magazine hit a nerve in both pro-life and pro-choice camps with its front cover story pronouncing that pro-lifers were winning the abortion wars—after having lost big on January 22, 1973. With reportedly more than 90 new abortion regulations passed by 24 governors since 2010, there is little doubt that the incrementalist strategy championed by leading pro-life organizations like Americans United for Life is gaining ground.
Still, misunderstanding about the contentious issue abounds, and mainstream polling agencies and media outlets seem to care little about getting the facts straight. Continue reading