• cindy-cooper

    Thanks very much for these insights. Understanding the language and how it came about is so critical in these times — central to unmasking the distortions and manipulations. Your depth of knowledge and understanding makes this critical reading.

  • crowepps

    The impulse to define and enforce ‘woman’s role’ in a way that helps men feel psychologically affirmed has a long tradition. Of course, being reduced to a mirror or a measuring stick makes women ‘things’ instead of people. One of the reasons it was so difficult after WW II to get those women out of the factories and back into the kitchen was that the factory was a much EASIER job that actually included the startling concept of TIME OFF.

  • kate-ranieri

    Calling a physician a baby killer is more than offensive language, to be sure. Comparing abortion to the Holocaust is reprehensible. Both tactics are, as you wrote, inflammatory, a hallmark of the antichoice rhetoric. Your article provides a critical piece of history that many have forgotten and others simply never knew. The concern for masculinity happened post WWII as well. While a large percentage of women worked outside the home in industries for the military, most were displaced upon the military men’s return home. Using a simplified version of history, there was a male identity crisis there as well. Women were a threat. The cultural message was constructed that women were to root their identity in familial and parental roles. Any woman who defied that role was suspect. Men wanted their jobs back, wanted to assume what was thought to be roles for “real” men. There’s a lot of conservative rhetoric around family, maternal instincts, men’s roles, and such.

    Another tidbit about the antichoicers is frightening particularly around a doctrine that demands subordination of individuals to community, that is opposed to abortion/homosexuality and contraception, that believes women are on this earth to bring forth children, that men prove their manhood by spawning offspring, and that their doctrine is THE truth. It speaks to both the Catholic church and Hitler’s doctrine in Mein Kampf. While acknowledging extreme differences, I want to emphasize that both “camps” promote a mythic narrative about maternal instinct and nature, that contraceptives are abortifacients and that abortion is evil. So for antichoicers to compare a reproductive health care clinic as a little Auschwitz is absurd. Clinics do function to purify any ethnicity, do not discriminate on the basis of religion, disabilities or sexual orientation.

    I realize this is history in a thimble but I wanted to add on to your already engaging article. Thanks.

  • truth

    “All aboard…the CRAZY TRAIN!” If you think the connection Carol Mason is attempting to make in this article leads anywhere at all. There is no logical parallel to soldiers killing armed vietnam citizens during war time(some women and children) who were armed by the men soldiers of these villages to a woman choosing to slaughter an innocent unborn child.

  • kate-ranieri

    You seem to have missed at least one point that the article clearly state–that it was O’Keefe who had the twisted logic. And like many antichoicers’ rhetoric, O’Keefe’s logic is deeply flawed. 

  • kate-ranieri

    I also believe that much of the more radical antichoicers and antigovernment/militia are longing for what they imagine was an America in "the good old days" where Mom stayed home and Dad went to work, the president was white and all was right with the world–a sort of Leave it to Beaver world. Woven in their antiabortion rhetoric are words and images of the "traditional family" with clearly defined gender roles that stand in stark contrast to their fears that these roles and family life have somehow been perverted by a liberalizing of America.

  • carol-mason

    I agree: it is not logical to compare Vietnam with abortion, which is why it is so fascinating to consider why pro-lifers like deParrie insisted on making the comparison.

  • carol-mason

    Thanks. I think you meant to write that "clinics do NOT function to purify any ethnicity, do not descriminate on the basis of religion…" etc.  You missed a "not" there and I wanted to make sure readers got that.

     

     

  • carol-mason

    There was a recent radio piece on My Lai broadcasted on NPR that readers may find helpful in understanding why it was such a horrible thing. Go to http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1035935&ps=rs

  • kate-ranieri

    Thanks for the clarification. I certainly did mean that clinics do NOT function…. my bad.

     

Mobile Theme