Welcome back to my monthly newsletter on Christianity and culture. This is always free, but you can get access to additional exclusive content, podcast transcripts, and more by becoming a Subscriber today.
Echoes of your ideas in First Things:
You provoked a response from National Review that ceded a lot of your points. Good work.
I think the prolife movement does tend to soft-sell women’s responsibility for abortion. That said, there’s several factors that play into that:
1) In order to enforce abortion bans, the testimony of the woman is required to convict the abortionist.
2) Planned Parenthood et al. portrays prolifers as he-man womun haters, so there’s a natural overcompensation for that.
3) Many Americans would not be open to more protections for unborn babies if in their mind it’s at the expense of women.
4) A lot of hardcore prolifers who do sidewalk counseling at abortion facilities have seen plenty of women dragged in there by mothers or fathers, or dumped out of the car by boyfriends.
That’s a lot of current to swim against.
As far as LiveAction’s video, dunking on “bro-choice” is so easy, but they and others dunk on women as well, especially when it comes to the “shout your abortion”-type folks: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CNgwsT295G8
The article demonstrates how some tend to scapegoat men for all ills. Scapegoating is a practice that has enormous psychological appeal, and we see scapegoating all around us in political and religious discussions.
Then the article correctly notes that we don't want to swing the pendulum to the opposite extreme by scapegoating women, which is common in the Manosphere.
Ironically, the article proceeds to its own scapegoating, of a sort that has become frequent in these articles.
First, we read: "In other words, since the era of industrialization, Anglo-American Christian culture (and secular culture) has tended to see women has naturally virtuous and men as the primary sources of evil in society." So, this problem is long-standing and seems to have roots in the Victorian era of the 19th century.
Then, we read: "Developments in today’s culture are making this Baby Boomer style white knight positioning harder to hold by the day. " Aha! Even though the problem has been widespread since the 19th century, it is all the fault of those Baby Boomers!
Aaron, please mature intellectually beyond this kind of practice.
Great content. Everything is a sales job, and accountability doesn’t sell.
What is the argument these pro life groups would make for women continuing to have the franchise if they don't have enough agency in their own lives to decide whether or not to get an abortion without becoming a victim?
Several decades ago, the Focus on the Family magazine had an article by a woman whose son had gotten his girlfriend pregnant. They were about 17 or 18.
The woman tried to convince the pregnant girl not to abort the baby, promising that she and her husband would adopt the baby, give it a great home, the mother could be involved or not as she chose in the future, etc. Nothing ever got through; the pregnant girl was determined to abort her baby.
Finally, in one of their last conversations, the girl revealed her reasoning. She was going to abort the baby rather than carry it to term and give it up for adoption because she "didn't want to lose her figure."
Experience with a few of these cases might cure the "women who abort are victims" crowd of their delusions.