I’ve changed my mind about the outcry against sex-selective abortion. Since the 1980s, when the issue emerged here in India and neighboring China, I’ve been skeptical of feminist objections to aborting baby girls on the basis of their sex. As someone long opposed to abortion of any kind, I’ve found such objections inconsistent: if you are truly prochoice, you can’t seco (...)
Columnists
The Unwanted
EXTENDING THE ARGUMENT AGAINST SEX-SELECTIVE ABORTION
The remainder of this article is only available to paid subscribers. If you’re not currently a Commonweal subscriber in print or online, an online-only subscription costs just $34 a year. Click here for immediate access.
Jo McGowan writes: "Progressive thinking begins with the premise that everyone has the right to be here, and that a community can be judged on how it plans for and includes the most vulnerable." We must never cease making this point to our brothers and sisters on the "left."
The author states: "you can’t second-guess a woman’s reasons for what she chooses."
When a professional woman working her way up the corporate ladder chooses to have an abortion, she is desperately trying to be like the white male system - namely wombless. In this case, besides blaming such women, there is larger systemic guilt. I know of such a woman who admitted her ambitions; but after such an abortion, she also realized that this is ultimate sexism in the working place and chose to leave such a dark environment.
I agree with the author when she states: "Rather than focusing on the inconsistency of that position, pro-life activists could learn from the feminist strategy of highlighting one aspect of a much larger issue."
Speaking of inconsistency, pro-life could also learn from the challenging "Seamless Garment" because, in addition to abortion it rejects capital punishment, euthanasia, and war; and it may take more compassion since many of the killers and those being killed are not as innocent and defenseless as an unborn child.