Women for Coat Hangers??
by tristero
As feared (and sadly, expected), responsible media outlets have decided to prostrate themselves to the extreme right. Today, the New York Times published an article by an advocate of coat hanger abortions who complained that her position was excluded from the Women's March.
Oh, she gussied up her screed with all sorts of fancy rationalizations and buzz phrases reeking of empowerment. But she knows very well that if abortion was once again banned, it wouldn't end as she claims. Instead, thousands of poor women (especially of color) would die at the hands of back alley butchers.
And despite knowing this, she calls herself "pro-life." Ah, yes, "pro-life," a phrase so familiar now we don't even think about how utterly meaningless it is. But when you actually examine the actual ideas it disguises it's obvious: There is nothing positive about the advocacy of illegal abortion. And the position hidden by the phrase "pro-life" has nothing whatsoever to do with life. But it does have everything to do with politics, politics that are deadly for the poor.
Most importantly, the majority of American women do not support forcing poor women to terminate pregnancies in a back alley.
And that is why it is essential that we make it impossible for people to hide their violent, cruel positions behind meaningless, anodyne phrases.