framing anti-choice concern
June 18, 2007 by elyzabethe
Yesterday, the Stacy Zallie foundation took out a full-page ad in the Washington Post. In honor of father’s day, the organization decided to trot out some anti-choice doublethink about how giving women reproductive options actually harms women. To be fair, the group doesn’t say whether or not it supports anti-choice legal policies. It is, ostensibly, just an organization to counsel women who have had abortions and are feeling depressive/suicidal afterwards. Maybe it is well-intentioned. Still, this line (part of the letter from Stacy Zallie’s dad) rang some bells:
“I am not taking a stand one way or another on the issue of abortion itself. However, it is ignorant to expect that a woman involved in terminating the life of her own child will be happy to go about her life without consequences.”
Not taking a stand. Really? Because the language you used in that following seems to imply, uh, otherwise.
You hear that, 1.3 million American women who have abortions each year? If you haven’t killed yourself yet, you probably should. Either that or seek counseling immediately, because it is ignorant – ignorant! – to kid yourself into thinking that maybe you just made the best choice possible for your own individual circumstances and you’re just fine with it. Stacy Zallie’s dad knows better.
that definitely sounds like taking a stand to me. someone needs to tell the stacy zallie foundation that post abortion syndrome is not recognized by the american psychological association.
I thought it was weird that she said that a woman wouldn’t like to go on with her life without consequences - do we see lots of women who’ve had abortions running around begging to be punished?
It amazes me that we have exactly opposite views on everything. I almost blogged about pro-life matters this week.
On a side note–please refer to people who are opposed to abortion as pro-life. We’re not anti-choice, we’re just morally opposed to the choices that abortion provides. I reference people who favor abortion as pro-choice. Personally, it’s a sign of respect to use the opposing side’s preferred terminology.
Adrienne, like we keep telling you, many conservatives aren’t as open-minded as you (i.e., the ones who refer to doctors who perform abortions as ‘murderers’). You make a good point, but elyzabethe is just trying to reframe the debate, however hard that might be. Besides, she wouldn’t be a good libertarian if she didn’t talk about everything in terms of choice… I think the disrespect vibe you’re getting is the disdain elyzabethe has for all those who (conciously or not) don’t think women are intelligent enough to think through their decisions. Gosh, that was quite a rant. And here I was just going to tease Adrienne again for being the gang’s token conservative…
Adrienne, sorry, but I deliberately refer to the “pro-life” side as “anti-choice” because I think it is a better term for it. Firstly, to refer to anti-abortion activists as “pro-life” implies that the other side is “anti-life,” which is of course not true. Even putting aside the sticky arguments about when life begins and whether or not abortion is really ending a life and all that, a majority of Americans (70-something percent) are pro-choice, but not all of them are personally morally agreeable to abortion, they just believe it should be a viable legal option — so to imply that they are “anti-life” would be unfair. I would actually be more likely to call these people — the people who support abortion rights but still feel that abortion is murder — “pro-life.” But the anti-abortion activists that would make all abortion illegal? Nope, that’s anti-choice right there.
It is completely a matter of framing, obviously, but I know many people believe that letting anti-abortion activists claim the term “pro-life” for so long has been a very bad framing strategy indeed. And as for the whole “sign of respect” thing — well, you being a good comm grad student, dear, I don’t really believe that you believe opposing sides of issues should always use the other side’s preferred terminology — that would totally be a matter of bad strategic communication and framing there! K. Montgomery would weep!
Anyway, I respect you so I respect your opinions, Adrienne. I’m glad you brought up the framing involved in all this, but we’ll have to agree to disagree on the abortion terminology here (p.s. there’s a great article on all this, from a neutral perspective — “framing abortion” — have you read it?)
P.S. Erin is right — my favorite libertarian slogan is: “Libertarians — Pro-Choice on Everything.”
I know that it’s bad communication and framing, but it would be nice to see mutual respect on both sides of the abortion issue. There’s been nothing but anger and hatred for far too long, which is why our country can’t reach a decision about what to do.
Framing is just a strategic form of name-calling.
[...] politics I think that Elyzabethe and I need to co-author an article examining the different frames around abortion from pro-life and pro-choice [...]
Adrienne -
Since you don’t know me, I want to start by saying that I am writing this with complete respect. I don’t know you except by what and how you express yourself and it seems genuine, heartfelt, and sincere.
But I did want to add my two cents. The decision to use the term “anti-choice” instead of “pro-life” does not need to be an issue of marketing or respect. It’s about precision. Most people who describe themselves as “pro-life” are not only conveying their own personal wish to never have an abortion or (for men) support the decision to have an abortion. They are also conveying the fact that they do not want anyone to have an abortion. In other words, they support taking the choice away from others.
There are lots of people who believe personally that abortion is murder and they would never ever have one or (for men) support the decision to have one, but who also do not feel it is their business what other people do in those situations. It might literally be true that they are “pro-life” but calling them that, given how the term is actually used, does not accurately convey where they stand.
So what really is the more precise term for what elyzabethe is addressing? Anti-choice.
The “pro-life” label was created as a marketing tool to make the political position more palatable. Just as “pro-choice” was. One just happens to be a better, more precise description.
There may be a lot of sincere, genuine people who cherish and believe in the sanctity of life and therefore identify themselves as pro-life. But there are also many, who by their actions, are using the sanctimony of the pro-life rhetoric to mask a deeply intrusive and at times misogynst world view.
I think the use of the term anti-choice actually helps.
[...] 21st, 2007 by elyzabethe In the comments of a previous post, there’s been some discussion of framing and abortion-debate-terminology. Nothing [...]
Y’all’s compassion for women like Stacy is staggering. And I bet her family just gets warm fuzzies from people like you.
Why don’t you all just go to Stacy’s grave and piss on it? Because that’s the degree of contempt you’re showing.