As most are aware, the Women’s March on January 21st- allegedly one of the largest protests in history- excluded as one sponsor certain pro-life feminist groups. Of course, it soon descended into a Leftist agenda free-for-all where “environmental justice,” LGBT ad infinitum rights, civil rights, etc. were included. Welcome to the confusing byzantine world of intersectional feminism.
If they had left it at the first unifying principle- women’s rights are human rights- perhaps the whole parade would not have been so silly because, after all, women are humans. Unfortunately, their definition of “humanity” does not extend into the womb and is more concerned with selfish, misinformed millennial protesters wearing pink hats.
Feminist/atheist writer and all-around ugly person Amanda Marcotte Tweeted, “You cannot be anti-choice and feminist” and that opposition to abortion was a “misogynist act.” Many of the sponsors like Planned Parenthood and NARAL hold a similar view. To these self-proclaimed gatekeepers of modern feminism, it goes beyond demands for “equal pay,” greater participation in the political process, and addressing violence against women. Instead, the central tenet of what defines a feminist today is whether they approve or disapprove of abortion.
But by their own definition, it goes beyond the moniker of “feminist.” Instead, one’s position on abortion is today, to the feminist, grounds for inclusion or exclusion from womanhood.
Their’s is an alleged social movement that disbelieves in the “big tent” theory. They insist on ideological purity with being pro-choice at the top of that purity checklist. The real motivation is to be found in the words of feminist writer Katha Pollit at The Nation when she states:
(a) movement that doesn’t defend them (pro-life feminists) and promotes instead some vague notion of “unity” is bound to be weak tea to the women who are the movement’s strongest activists.
In other words, feminism in 2017 is what the strongest activists say it is. She later erroneously states that:
If you demand that every girl and woman who becomes pregnant bear a child no matter the consequences to herself, and if you call on the government to back that up through criminal law, there isn’t a lot left to the ideals of equality and self-determination that are fundamental to feminism.
First, no true pro-life person has ever called for criminal sanctions against someone seeking or having an abortion. And while one can agree that whether or not to have a child is included in that broad “self-determination” category, given the plethora of options to avoid pregnancy- some government financed- the abortion-on-demand cries ring somewhat hollow. Third, it is an unequal world given human anatomy and physiology. Women- and only women- can give birth. To today’s feminist, that is a curse right up there with their menstrual cycle and unsightly breasts.
Pollit summarizes modern feminism when she states that one sperm can derail a woman for life. She flippantly swipes away the sentiments of many young women who are actually pro-life feminists by referring to them as “egg incubators.” And as bad as she is, there are others who point blank state it is their right to choose whether to have an abortion or not. Perhaps if they had made better “choices” prior to becoming pregnant this would never be a controversy.
Another writer states that just because you are woman it does not automatically make you a feminist. That much is true since only about 18% of American women consider themselves a “feminist” despite a huge majority believing in equality of the sexes. Feminism may draw thousands to the National Mall on a Saturday in January, but it is a dying movement.
As the mythical pay gap is a thing of past, as more women than men comprise the workforce, as women push into jobs and roles that were traditionally the exclusive realm of men, as more and more women are elected to office at all levels of government, modern feminism has run out of things to rally around. They are left with either figments of the imagination (the campus rape culture) or ethical decisions with no solution (abortion) despite Supreme Court decisions.
This subject is one they cannot win other than by dehumanizing either the developing fetus, or dehumanizing women who disagree with their mindset. That Women’s March and all the other actions like a Day Without Women are a thesis on what it means to be a woman today. To the feminist gatekeepers, no matter a woman’s view on immigration, racial equality, violence against women or anything else in their 12 principles, failure to adopt the pro-choice view relegates one to non-feminist. She is a non-woman, or a sub-human. In effect, it is dehumanizing.
And what has history taught us about dehumanizing those with different values, or those who believe alternative views are less worthy, or certain people are less worthy of participating in the debate or march? Historically, the outcomes have not ended well. They can dress up the language in words that twist the bounds of the English language and make up words all they want. This is not about “reproductive justice” whatever the hell that means. This is simply a power play by the feminist gatekeepers today to maintain their power and 15 minutes of fame amid a background of a dying movement.
Having accomplished most of its real tangible goals, modern feminism is in its death throes. The only thing they have to hang onto is the abortion controversy- a controversy without end- and the creation of stupid notions like intersectionality which is simply a hodgepodge of the Leftist agenda cloaked in the language of feminism and applied to women. The sooner the movement actually dies, the better.
It is kind of ironic, hypocritical and self-defeating that modern feminism that they now view gender as a “construct” and push the bounds of the definition of the sexes. On the other hand, they determine what is means to be a true feminist, or a true woman…or as is sadly the case, a human.