The Other Sexual Politics
Amanda has an excellent post up about how, when it comes down to it, abortion is not the real issue for the Right, it’s all about controlling women. (Obvious I know, and I’m probably preaching to the choir, but there are still those fixated on the icky side of the abortion debate who don’t get it.) The post also neatly illustrates the real mechanisms of practical politics -how to divide and conquer the political opposition by Doing Things With Rules.
Turns out they wanted to keep the abortion rate high after all
Published by Amanda Marcotte October 2nd, 2006 in Reproductive Rights.There?s something almost kind of charming about William Saletan?s straining to believe that anti-choicers are actually interested in protecting ?life? more than limiting women?s choices. (Via.) However, he?s straining so hard on this latest column that I can?t help but think he?s going to break a blood vessel. The issue this time out is the 95-10 solution that?s being promoted as a ?compromise? between anti- and pro-choicers?the idea behind the bill is that by identifying the reasons women get abortions and working to take away those reasons, then the abortion rate should reduce. Pro-choicers get a slew of things they want, like financial help for single mothers and better contraceptive access and anti-choicers get to see fewer abortions.
Now this bill is the perfect wedge issue, of course, because it drives a wedge between the people who actually do want to see abortions reduced and the ?pro-lifers?, who are primarily about hating Teh Sex. It was predicted that the anti-choicers would balk at this bill because they are all about preventing people from having safe sex. It was patently obvious that anti-choicers would oppose effective measures to lower the abortion rate because those measures would have to deal maturely with the fact that people fuck, which makes it all the funnier that Saletan is acting surprised here.
Then Ryan looked at the data and realized that to get anywhere near their target, he and his pro-life colleagues would have to provide more birth control. That?s when the squirming began.
Some of Ryan?s allies worried that morning-after pills might prevent embryos from implanting, so he omitted such pills from his bill. They opposed requiring private insurers to offer contraceptive coverage, so he took that out, too. They complained that other pregnancy-prevention bills hadn?t emphasized abortion reduction, so he put abortion reduction in the title. They wanted sex education programs to emphasize abstinence; they got it. The only troublesome thing left in the bill was birth control.
In other words, Ryan?s ?allies?, when they realized that he was serious about a pragmatic program to reduce the abortion rate, flipped shit and started taking out the very things that will be effective, from sex education so that women know how not to get pregnant in the first place to actual female-controlled contraception.
Saletan casts around, seeking more and more strained arguments that he just knows will convince the anti-choicers to embrace empowering women to control our reproductive lives, but it?s just one of those differences of opinion you can?t really compromise on. Anti-choicers are adamantly opposed to women having power over their reproductive lives as a fundamental principle. You can?t keep saying, ?Well, how about letting them have this power? Or maybe this power?? because the answer will always be, ?Wait, no that?s still power. None of the above.?
But it does go to show why this bill is such a great wedge issue. The Democrats introduce a bill that will definitely lower the number of abortions each year by a significant amount and the people claiming to detest abortion kill the bill. Guess they actually like having a high abortion rate, right? Well, not exactly, of course. But when given a choice between lowering the abortion rate and disempowering women, they?re going to pick the latter ever single time, which demonstrates where their priorities lay.
For actvists, particularly new media activists, it’s tempting to join in the online foodfight of the latest cause celebre, but it’s the instances of practical politicking like the one Amanda highlights that make the difference in the long term.
It’s just a shame the Dems didn’t use the same tactic when Bush’s torture bill and suspension of habeas corpus was up for discussion and vote.
Read more: Abortion, Pro-Choice, Republican hypocrisy
