I don't believe that all anti-abortion advocates are acting in bad faith, or that they all want to control women. I do believe that many of them have genuine religious objections to abortion, and that these objections don't necessarily make them misogynists. But I also believe that on both sides of the debate are men who don't really get what it's like when something is not their decision to make. It's time for them to learn.
Oh, please. Do "teach" us blinded, oppressive, piggish men, Anna N.
Nothing in the abortion rights saga has been more stunning to Harrogate over the last decade--and this is including the murder of George Tiller, which was more heartbreaking than it was surprising for Harrogate--than the persistent presence on the blogosphere of women writers lashing out at male supporters of abortion rights, for having the audacity to enter the conversation in the first place. There are so many things wrong with such "logic," one hardly knows where to begin.
Anna N. asserts that Friedersdorf's post amounted to a threat by men, to withdraw financial and emotional investment in their offspring in response to the rhetoric of people like Anna N. But of course this is not at all what Friedersdorf's post said. But then, truth is not really a primary concern for those who worship at such poisonous wells.
For that is what identity politics has become, in the popular culture, in the political sphere, and increasingly, in the academic humanities as well. One wishes this were a straw man argument, but then one wishes a lot of things.
The illusion that women in the United States suffer greatly, that a vast patriarchy oppresses Anna N. and her sisters, must be maintained at all costs by any good progressive.
Blech on the race baiters and blech on the ovary peddlers too.