Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

Politics | 05/31/2009 11:00 pm

Pro-Life Feminism Births a Great – and Inexhaustible – Debate

The rise of ‘pro-life feminism’ raises endless questions on the real meaning of the F word.
By Andrew Belonsky
© Getty Images

There was a time when right-leaning groups decried the proverbial “specter” of feminism. But now, 40 years after Gloria Steinem broke onto the feminist scene, an entirely different group of women are reclaiming the F word: “the pro-life feminists.” These women claim that the better-known feminists have perverted the term and, as a consequence, glorified abortion. Opponents of “pro-life feminism,” meanwhile, have equally harsh words for the movement – and its moniker.

“[Pro-life feminism] is a bit of an oxymoron,” says Ellen Malcolm, the IBM heiress who founded Emily’s List, a political machine designed to elect pro-choice female lawmakers. “To say that women should be able to make decisions about their own lives, except when it comes to their bodies — that seems contradictory to me.”

True, it’s hard for some people to comprehend the pro-life feminist camp, but that doesn’t make them any less real. In fact, many of its adherents claim the movement started far before the first woman burned her bra. It can be traced, they say, back to the legendary suffragette, Susan B. Anthony.

Two Steps Back, One Step Forward?

On July 8, 1869, a paper called The Revolution, which was founded by Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Anthony, published an article entitled “Marriage and Maternity,” in which the author, known only as "A," describes abortion as “child murder.” The act is not simply a sin, it’s a symptom of the “noxious weed” that is patriarchal domination:

Women are educated to think that with marriage their individuality ceases or is transferred to their husbands. The wife has thenceforth no right over her own body. This is also the husband’s belief, and upon which he acts … It is clear to my mind that this evil wholly arises from the false position which woman occupies in civilized society.

Anthony had in fact spoken out against abortion – as exhibited in her oft-quoted speech, “Social Purity,” which equates abortion with infanticide – but Salon’s Tracy Clark-Flory points out that there’s no direct evidence to prove Anthony indeed wrote this piece. Regardless of the identity of "A," today’s pro-life feminists often invoke Anthony’s name in their crusade against abortion.

In 1992, former Heritage Foundation staff member Marjorie Dannenfelser founded a group called the Susan B. Anthony List as "an answer to Emily’s List." "It was very clear to me that if we wanted to have pro-life women in public office we were going to have to build a political machine to make that happen," explained Dannenfelser. While Dannenfelser’s group, which boasts a membership of 158,000, works mostly with Republicans – they gave $234,002 to 35 candidates during the last election cycle – the Susan B. Anthony List describes itself as nonpartisan and has in the past worked with a handful of Democrats, including late Pennsylvania Lt. Gov. Catherine Baker-Knoll. Though the group claims it’s working to “advance the role of pro-life women in the political process,” the List does at times help men who have opposed pro-choice women.

Some, of course, could argue that funding men over women undermines their female-centric mission, but Dannenfelser disagrees: “I believe that the life issue so undermines women … I couldn’t, in good conscience, support a woman that I thought was undermining the health, welfare and happiness of other women, because that is truly how I see it.” Ellen Malcolm, the founder of Emily’s List, sees their approach quite differently: “They want to keep progressive women out of Congress and elected office, and I think they have a very Republican Conservative agenda.”

While Dannenfelser, who grew up Episcopalian and points out that she was once pro-choice, insists she’s turned off by the violence inherent in abortion, another pro-life activist, Jenn Giroux, and her “Women Influencing the Nation” approach the argument with more piety.

317 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Marjorie C.

Libra:  just because Bill O expressed his opinion…

I’m surprised they haven’t brought Sarah Palin and her family into the fray.  I haven’t seen Bill O today, but I’m sure whatever he is saying I am on the same page with him.  We all have our opinions about the likes of Tiller.   

By Marjorie C. on 06/01/2009 11:34 am
Libra Lady
Majorie…Bill O was speaking about tiller what many were feeling….what about the judges Bill O calls on the red carpet who let child molesters go free, or the illegal alien drunk drivers who have killed Americans and get off….he is on top of calling out these people, and I have to agree with Bill O.
By Libra Lady on 06/01/2009 11:40 am
MK P
What is the purpose of calling out these judges who do not rule as O’Reilly thinks they should, or people who evidently O’Reilly believes were not correctly sentence — if supposed monsters — if not to make them targets for some vigilante revenge? All because O’Reilly evidently doesn’t agree with the laws of our land……….
By MK P on 06/01/2009 8:00 pm
Bill Lee
Because it is our responsibility as a nation to call out public officials that don’t do their job. If we don’t hold them accountable, who will?
By Bill Lee on 06/01/2009 11:24 pm
MK P
Tiller was not a public official. But, beyond that, it is the responsibility of local communities to hold their won public officials accountable. O’Reilly is simply using his show as a bully pulpit to pander to the religious right.
By MK P on 06/02/2009 6:38 am
Patty E
MARJORIE—-when we define terrorism, in the way the GWB and Cheney defines it—-the murder of Tiller was indeed ‘terrorism’……so…do you think it’s ‘OK’ in America for religious reasons?  And no where else?
By Patty E on 06/01/2009 11:49 am
Judy K.
How many times and how many ways does it have to be said, IT IS NO ONE’S BUSINESS BUT YOUR OWN.  Why oh why do people decry abortion when there are so few that care about the people already here.  The way things are going Mother Nature just might stomp her foot and wipe out a great many of us on her own since we can’t seem to realize that we are strangling Her earth.
By Judy K. on 06/01/2009 12:47 am
Andrea Brandon

Touche, Judy K.

By Andrea Brandon on 06/01/2009 11:00 pm
siasp surate

Oh boy, we better brace ourselves because this is going to cause a lot of controversy. Now, for my 2 cents.

I’m a feminist-have been for a long time- was a women’s studies minor in college. I think the main question here is can a feminist be pro-life. The answer is, yes, but only as an individual. Pro-choice people are for choice, so if you choose to never have an abortion, that is fine, your choice. If for some reason you need the choice of being able to have an abortion, that is also fine. The thing about being a feminist is that she/he can’t support legislation that makes this choice for you.

As for Dr. Tiller, I think it is so sad. A pro-lifer killing a person, now that is an oxymoron.

By siasp surate on 06/01/2009 12:59 am
HA BIBI
Well it sure is, the Good Dr, (LOLOLOL) wasn’t killed because anyone thought he was pretty!
By HA BIBI on 06/01/2009 10:45 am
Amanda C

it doesn’t matter who he was. he was murdered. you should be mourning for the loss of life.

aren’t you pro-life, ha bibi?

By Amanda C on 06/01/2009 4:44 pm
Andrea Brandon

M Jung -

"aren’t you pro-life, ha bibi?"

It seems to me that all pro-lifer and pro-choicer advocates should be mouring Tiller’s life. If the issue of abortion was simply left to the mother without any governmental regulations then there would have been one less death in Kansas.

By Andrea Brandon on 06/01/2009 11:05 pm
Marjorie C.

DeBurca:  YOU support terrorism.

This wasn’t terrorism, this was one sharpshooter taking out what he perceived to be a murderer.  No other people were hurt.  Why are some women defending this abhorrent baby killer so?  Doing what he had to do to end the lives of those infants makes me wonder if the doctor was sane.  After all, he was warned time and again that something bad was going to happen…  why did he continue?  Was it for the women in need or was it because he enjoyed his job.  I say good riddance.  If that makes me a right wing terrorist, then so be it.     

By Marjorie C. on 06/01/2009 10:53 am
Libra Lady
Marjorie…the late term abortions he performed were to babies who could have lived outside of the Mother’s womb…..the thought of this upsets my stomach.  He murdered these babies….it’s just like a woman who has a premature baby…could she take away any kind of life support and not save her baby?
By Libra Lady on 06/01/2009 10:58 am
Marjorie C.

Libra:  ...the thought of this upsets my stomach. 

Poster Bella Mia (around p. 5) has a good solution for abortion — televise it.  One glimpse of what goes on with late-term abortions would give me never ending nightmares and nausea. 

By Marjorie C. on 06/01/2009 11:52 am