" 'Pro-Life', that's a lie."

Dr. George Tiller, one of the few doctors in the USA who performed late abortions, was shot and killed while attending church this morning.

"The chilling fact of Dr. Tiller's death comes after years of being terrorized: he'd been shot before (in both arms); had his clinic bombed, flooded and vandalized; received decades of death threats; wild lawsuits; and was the unfortunate target of conservative media that hounded him. He'd also been stabbed--and went back to work the next day." -Anna Clark for RH Reality Check

Personally, I just want to say condolences to Mrs. Tiller, Dr. Tiller's family and friends with hope and love for the people affected by and organizing for reproductive justice and abortion rights.

We may be entering scary times. Much love to all you out there.

Breaking the Silence: On Living Pro-Lifers' Choice for Women

From Shakesville:

Hey, Shakers, Liss has graciously allowed me to yell in her forum. Many thanks, Liss. I have no other outlet for what I'm about to say. I want to tell you first: at least one of you knows me in person. What I'm about to say is something you do not know about me. If it's not you, then one of your friends might be like me.

I'm the birth mother of an adopted child, vehemently pro-choice, non-Christian, very unsuited to motherhood, and after over a decade, have got some things to tell the world about adoption. It's been stewing since I heard about the recent rash of pre-abortion ultrasound legislation. While I am touched that so many men in such various states are so deeply worried about women possibly being all sad from having an abortion, I wish to point out to these compassionately bleeding hearts that the alternatives are not exactly without their own emotional consequences.

...

I have given a baby up for adoption, and I have had an abortion, and while anecdotes are not evidence, I can assert that abortions may or may not cause depression - it certainly did not in me, apart from briefly mourning the path not taken - but adoption? That is an entirely different matter. I don't doubt that there are women who were fine after adoption, and there is emphatically nothing wrong with that or with them; but I want to point out that if we're going to have a seemingly neverending discussion about the sorrow and remorse caused by abortion, then it is about goddamn time that we hear from birth mothers too.

Read the rest of the amazing piece here.

Obama lifts Global Gag rule against abortion-2/2

Obama lifts Global Gag rule against abortion-1/2

Unfortunately, the sound is a bit off.

Frustrating comments from the abortion wars

There are so many frustrating comments flung back and forth between the pro-choice and anti-choice movement.

Part of the reason I love my work at CAF is, we cut out that crap (at least, most of the time ;) ). On our show, we just cut off the anti-choice callers. We don't engage too much with the "other side." We're too busy protecting and helping the women that call us in their desperate, vulnerable moments and who are willing to contact us to help them empower themselves and improve their lives.

Recently, while reading the comments of an article in the Washington Post about a medical student's weighing of whether or not to become an abortion doctor, I wasn't surprised about the slinging of insults, facts, and fantasy back and forth between people. Quite frankly, both sides annoyed me. But the most ridiculous argument was:

"By that line of reasoning, shall we wonder why pro-choicers only start caring about children when they leave the womb?"

(in response to "[anti-choicers] only care about fetuses, not children")

Some judgmental pro-choice people might follow that line of thinking, but no reproductive justice activist (of which I am) would ever not care about the health of a pregnancy. Us reproductive justice activists care about the first environment (the womb) and fight for reproductive health and environmental health (a major reason women and reproductive organs are unhealthy). We are often the ones fighting for more (FREE) pre-natal care, access to alternative birthing means*, better food in neighborhoods, etc. etc. From what I've read, states with the most liberal abortion laws often have the healthiest children and most programs that improve the lives of families, especially women and children.

At CAF, we place a series of follow-up calls with the women who use our services. Sometimes women decide to go through with their pregnancies or are forced too because they were too far along (both outcomes have many reasons behind them). We offer to send them an informational package with many resources (helpline numbers, programs, informational brochures)- on parenting, pre-natal health, birthing options, breastfeeding, newborn and infant care, support groups and more.

I care about and fight for the rights of women and children. The only difference for me, however, is I don't consider a pregnancy a child unless the woman does. I am sensitive enough to use whatever language the woman and/or would-be mother wants to use to pull myself up to her level. Because I'm not in her situation. This is a sensitivity- nay, a conviction- anti-choice people seem to lack.



*Doulas, for instance, consistently improve parental-newborn bonding and with all parties'- mother(s), child(ren), father(s), etc.- overall health and satisfaction with the birth.

An Intersectional, Reproductive Justice Feminist Response to LaBruzzo's Sterilization Plan . . .

For those who are not aware, on Tuesday, September 23rd, Rep. LaBruzzo of Metarie, Louisiana (a suburb of New Orleans) made the statement that, so that Louisiana wouldn't be in an economic crisis, he's looking to propose a bill to "voluntarily" sterilize the number of people he feels are dependent on the government as a way to decrease the state burden.

The Women's Health & Justice Initiative[1] and the New Orleans Women's Health Clinic[2] condemn Representative John LaBruzzo's recent legislative plans to pay poor women to get sterilized and reward rich, educated people to have children. The sterilization policy currently being advocated by Representative LaBruzzo is a blatant form of reproductive violence and population control policies of blame and disenfranchisement, rooted in this country's long and continual history of eugenics. The legislation and criminalization of black and poor women's bodies, sexuality, fertility, and motherhood are being used as regulatory tools for economic and ideological justification for eugenics. If Mr. LaBruzzo is really concerned about ending poverty and reducing social burdens on the state, he would not be advocating punitive social polices that restrict women's reproductive autonomy, but instead would be focusing his attention on ending corporate welfare and holding the corporate giants of Wall Street accountable for the disastrous state of the country's economy. Stigmatizing and blaming the bodies and reproductive capabilities of black and poor women, and other marginalized communities, as the cause of poverty, mask Representative LaBruzzo's unwillingness to fully examine the complex structural causes of poverty and inequality in our society. Reproductive violence and sterilization abuse at the hands of elected officials should be challenged and condemned. Women receiving public assistance and housing subsidies have RIGHT to have or not have children, as well as the RIGHT to parent the children they do have and control their birthing options[3] without punitive racial discrimination and economic exploitation policies designed to denied their RIGHT to exist and achieve full protection of their human rights. All women, regardless of their race, sexuality, ability, household size, economic, housing, and citizenship status, have the right to live whole healthy lives free of control, violence, regulation, and coercive social policies designed to exploit their economic vulnerability for sterilization and contraception abuse.


Social justice organizations, activists, organizers, and advocates are encouraged to use the following as talking points challenging Representative John LaBruzzo's eugenic agenda.


Eugenics, Reproductive Violence, Population Control, and Sterilization Abuse


The sterilization policy currently being advocated by Representative John LaBruzzo is a blatant form of reproductive violence and population control policies of blame and disenfranchisement, rooted in this country's long and continual history of eugenics.

These reproductive modification tactics of Representative LaBruzzo are reminiscent, if not the same, of eugenics policies of the early twentieth century to forcibly sterilize thousands of people thought to be socially undesirable to procreate, particularly immigrants, the poor, people of color, people incarcerated, people with disabilities, and those with mental illnesses.

Eugenicists, like LaBruzzo, opposed social programs designed to improve the living conditions of the poor, arguing that adequate medical care, better working conditions, and minimum wages all harmed society because those measures enabled people with inferior heredity to live longer and produce more children[4]. These sentiments are directly related to LaBruzzo's statements that "mainstream strategies for attacking poverty, such as education reform and family planning program have failed to solve the problem," yet he wants to create incentives for college-educated, higher income people to have more children.

The measures Representative LaBruzzo are currently proposing is an example of controlled consent. There's nothing voluntary about using monetary incentives to exploit women's economic vulnerability.

The reproductive autonomy of women of color and poor women should not be compromised to support Representative LaBruzzo's eugenic policy to sterilize, blame, disenfranchise, and restrict the rights of women to control and care for their bodies, reproduction, and sexuality.

Mandating sterilization as a condition or punishment for receiving public assistance and housing subsidies is racist, sexist, and politically idiotic!

It is disturbing that reproductive modification policies and practices that disempower women because of their family size and economic status can receive such widespread support. It truly shows that eugenics lies at the heart of LaBruzzo's plans.

This is a direct reflection of the reproductive violence and sterilization abuse that women of color and poor women continue to face at the hands of the state.


Criminalization of Black Women's Sexuality, Fertility, & Motherhood


Policies that promote the control and criminalization of black motherhood have no place in our society.

As a result of punitive welfare reforms instituted during the Clinton Administration in the mid 1990s, the attacks and criminalization of women of color and poor women's reproduction and sexuality has continued unabated despite the fact that TANF/FITAP assistance has been steadily decreasing over the past decade in Louisiana.

Mr. LaBruzzo is reinforcing racial and gender stereotypes by using the bodies of poor black women and other vulnerable communities as a scapegoat to bolster his political career to win the hearts and minds of a conservative base that continues to restrict women's reproductive rights.

Mr. LaBruzzo and his conservative base advocate abstinence-only sex education in schools that don't work. Their refusal to support resources needed for comprehensive preventative reproductive health services, including abortion and safe birth control methods, makes it clear that they have no concern for poor women's economic health and well-being. Rather, their interest is in the control and criminalization of poor women's reproduction and motherhood.


Economic Myths - Falsehoods LaBruzzo's idea is based on


What he's basically proposing is an economic stimulus plan attacking poor black women. So, if you're a woman, poor, and black, get in line- you're about to be sterilized!

The aggressive promotion of sterilization as a condition and punishment for receiving public assistance, and the use of coercive social policies that threaten women's health and well-being like those currently being advocated by LaBruzzo have nothing to do with eradicating poverty in our society.

According to LaBruzzo, the solution to ending poverty in our society is to control and regulate the fertility and sexuality of black women – not the creation of comprehensive programs to improve health care access, our education system, housing affordability, and employment opportunities in the state. His plan pathologizes the reproductive capabilities of Black and poor women by proposing legislation to exploit the economic vulnerability of those who are socially stereotyped as burdens on the state.

Even if sterilization is voluntary, POVERTY IS NOT! Poverty, economic insecurity, and lack of sustainable livelihood can cause a woman to consider this aggressive sterilization incentive a viable option.

LaBruzzo talks about poverty as though it were an infectious disease—a though poor people will eventually make everyone poor—rather than a condition people are condemned to by Louisiana's lack of investment in education, employment, affordable housing, and quality health care programs, services, and resources.

LaBruzzo uses a myth of scarcity to argue that if economic resources are shared with everyone, no one will have enough. The reality is that if the lion's share of our economic resources stopped being used for unnecessary military spending and corporate welfare, such as the Wall Street bailout, then all our communities would have access to the resources and opportunities they need to survive and thrive!

Despite the reality of who's on welfare and the total number of families receiving FITAP benefits in Louisiana, welfare assistance is socially and politically associated with Black mothers who are, unfortunately, already negatively stereotyped in mainstream media as "lazy," "irresponsible," "overly fertile," and "welfare queens." Because of these stereotypes, LaBruzzo has been able to gain support for his aggressive eugenic sterilization initiative using monetary incentives.

The exploitation and regulation of Black women's bodies and our reproductive capabilities to solve the social problems of poverty and the financial instability of the county's economy through legislation designed to sterilize poor and working class women of color is a barbaric attempt on the part of Representative John LaBruzzo to increase his popularly among conservatives, and to create a distraction from the real problems associated with the country's current economic crisis.


Economic Realities – What really creates the conditions LaBruzzo is "concerned" about


When we let the numbers of people who are on welfare speak for themselves, it becomes clear that this is not about welfare at all – it's about politicians like LaBruzzo who are committed to controlling the reproduction of communities of color and poor people by attacking the bodies and reproductive decisions of Black and poor women.

We are basically witnessing a two front war against poor and working class black communities right now. On one hand, we have the Bush administration fighting to push an economic corporate welfare bailout plan to save Wall Street, and on the other, we have an elected official blaming the bodies and reproductive decisions of poor black women for the social conditions caused by corporate greed.

Advocating for the sterilization of poor black women, and publicly demonizing their motherhood under the cloak of reducing the number of people on welfare, masks the complex causes of poverty and inequality that permeate our society. If Mr. LaBruzzo is really serious about addressing the problems plaguing our communities right now, he would be focusing his attention on creating legislation to end corporate greed, end the War in Iraq, holding corporations accountable for the toxins that they continue to put into the environment, funding our failing education system, providing people the health care they need now, and supporting affordable housing initiatives in the city.

The current punitive welfare policies Representative LaBruzzo is considering will render women of color, poor women, and women with disabilities vulnerable to sterilization and contraceptive abuse because of racial and class assumptions that their fertility is out of control. In reality, the average number of children women on welfare have in the state of Louisiana is two – but the image of the over-breeding "welfare queen" is fixed in the minds of many Americans, including Representative LaBruzzo.

Over the past decade, the number of women receiving welfare assistance in the state of Louisiana has been decreasing. In the past three years, we have seen a 74.24 percent drop in women receiving welfare. According to the Louisiana Department of Social Services, families receiving assistance through the Louisiana Families Independence Temporary Assistance Program (FITAP) was down from 5764 recipients in July 2005 to 1485 as of July 2008.

This is a sexist, racist, and elitist attempt to distract the public from those who are really creating social burdens on society – the corporate welfare giants of Wall Street, the war in Iraq, the over production of unnecessary commodities that negatively impact our environment, and the wasteful spending of public resources on programs--such as abstinence only sex education in schools-- that don't work!

The low-income women of color LaBruzzo feels so comfortable scapegoating for Louisiana's economic conditions are those who support Louisiana's economy by doing its low-wage work. When LaBruzzo goes to his office, these women clean it; when he goes to a restaurant, they wash the dishes; and when he stays at a hotel, they turn down his sheets. Rather than this mean-spirited attack, he should call for an increase in the minimum wage that would make it feasible for poor women to survive economically.


What We Need - Strategies & Social Programs for Moving Forward


Instead of mandating punitive measures to modify and pathologize poor women's reproductive decisions, we need legislation to increase women's access to high quality, non-coercive, voluntary reproductive health services and information including access to safe birth control, comprehensive sexual health education, and abortion services that are unbiased, age-appropriate and culturally competent.

The misguided priorities of legislator's like Mr. LaBruzzo to create monetary incentives for poor women to become sterilized fails to acknowledge how our state should be funding initiatives that support preventative health care programs and social services that work to strengthen and build the health of our communities, not blame them for reflecting the social problems of this country.

All women, regardless of their race, sexuality, ability, household size, economic, housing, and citizen status, have the right to live whole healthy lives free of control, violence, regulation, and coercive social policies designed to exploit their economic vulnerability for sterilization and contraception abuse at the hands of elected officials.

All women, regardless of their race, sexuality, ability, household size, economic, housing, and citizen status, have the right to live whole healthy lives free of control, violence, regulation, and coercive social policies designed to exploit their economic vulnerability for sterilization and contraception abuse at the hands of elected officials.

We need legislators who are committed to supporting responsible, accessible, and affordable public services and resources such as safe and quality health care, schools, childcare resources, non-punitive reproductive health services, affordable housing, family treatment programs, mental health services, and non-discriminatory employment opportunities.





[1] The New Orleans Women's Health & Justice Initiative is a multi-dimensional community-based organizing project centered on (1) improving low income and uninsured women of color access to quality, affordable, and safe health care services; and (2) organizing women for sexual health and reproductive justice through community-based strategies to equip those most disenfranchised by the medical industry with the means to control and care for their own bodies, sexuality, and reproduction. WHJI is a local affiliate of INCITE! Women of Color Against Violence – a national activist organization of radical feminists of color advancing a movement to end violence against women of color and our communities through direct action, critical dialogue and grassroots organizing.

[2] The New Orleans Women's Health Clinic (NOWHC) is a grassroots community-based non-profit women's health clinic – operated by a radical, women of color-led, feminist health collective. The mission of the New Orleans Women's Health Clinic is to equip marginalized and underserved women with the means to control and care for their own bodies, sexuality, reproduction, health through a holistic, community-centered well women approach to health care which integrates sexual health and reproductive justice. NOWHC is a local affiliate of INCITE! Women of Color Against Violence.

Bristol Palin's Pregnancy.

(if the video won't load, click here for the comedy central page)

Chicago Abortion Fund's August Call-In Show

Here's a taste, part 1 of 3. This month, Shay is joined by Ronnie from F.R.I.D.A- Feminist Response In Disability Activism.

The Secret Life of the American Teenager

First off, wow, what a horrible name! :)

Has anybody else been following this show on ABC Family? I don't have cable, but they stream the video online the day after it's been shown on TV, so I've been eagerly watching it whenever I get a chance.

You've gotta hand it to Brenda Hampton (creator of the show), after skirting around abortion and whitewashing a lot of issues on Seventh Heaven, she's actually diving into some serious issues that are hard to mention and discuss, especially when the adults in the picture are very rarely moral authorities to guide the kids.

The abortion episode ("Love for Sale") was... frustrating. Decent, but frustrating. First off, most clinics would NOT allow such a scene to be had in the lobby room. It was built up during the episode to be some big, scary thing (complete with Amy- the 15 and pregnant main character- crying when she was "rescued" off the exam table- why wasn't there a doctor or nurse with her?!) when in reality, I feel like a 15 year old giving birth is a much bigger, much scarier thing.

The preview before that episode had Molly Ringwald (Amy's mom) "confessing" to having been in a similar situation. I was really hoping she would 'fess up to having an abortion! The fact that her marriage is falling apart because she married her baby's dad due to being pregnant so young is interesting, though....

Ultimately, for TV, the episode was somewhat supportive of Amy's choice (she ended up deciding against abortion at the clinic). But the drama that was happening around her while she was changing her mind- and the show's insistence that she give up her baby for adoption- is a bit maddening. At an abortion clinic, there would have been counseling to make sure she wanted to have the abortion, and discuss adoption or parenting if not. Now, how many OB/GYNS are going to have counselors on sight to make sure giving birth is something you want to do?

There's so much more I want to say about the show, but two quicks things: one- it's great that they're working with The National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy but- I'm frustrated with the details. Most teen pregnancies do not involve 2 teenagers. Often, the male in the situation is at least 5 years older, often in their twenties. But a show about predatory men and victimized girls- that'd be a bit hard to make a romantic-funny-family sitcom about, no?.,

Talking about abortion.

Well, I am officially back from the East Coast- and I've written a blog post for my work. If you want to leave a comment about it, please leave it at my entry on that blog. Thanks!

---------------------------

Here’s a scene you’ll never see in a movie, play or TV show:

OB/GYN Doctor: (taking random medical history) Any previous pregnancies?

Woman: Two abortions.

Doctor: No full term pregnancies?

Woman: No. It wasn’t the right time.

Doctor: And this time? It’s the right time?

Woman: Yep.

Doctor: I’ve always been a bit confused as to why clinics have to do all this counseling to make sure you’re ready for an relatively quick abortion procedure while doctors like me are made to just assume that every woman and family is ready for this 18+ year; financially, physically and emotionally draining commitment.

But no. Abortion is used as a dramatic element- to create a death (backalley abortion); to create emotional distress (forced abortions, or women who shouldn’t have had an abortion in the first place and probably would have been told no by a reputable clinic); to add a heroine element (usually about doctors)...

Yet, in the USA 1 in 4 women will have an abortion by the time she is in her 40’s. If you bring that to a world wide statistic, it averages out to 1 abortion per women. One abortion per woman!!

I seriously don’t understand why people don’t talk about it more. Sure, it’s easier to see the effects of actually having children- there are children you are taking care of for quite a while. But I’ve been part of many a conversation where the gory details of a surgery, accident, or illness has been discussed; people talk about going to the doctor weeks before and after going, even for a mundane checkup. It’s maddening, the silence around this issue.

Owning Women's Bodies, Owning Women's Cunts

I’ll admit it. I read anti-choice blogs. And listen to anti-choice podcasts. Sometimes I wish I wasn’t adding to their hits, but I figure they probably do the same to our stuff.

Anyway. I was listening to some old podcasts that I’ve been waiting for some time to get to listen to (we’ve been traveling a lot here at CAF). And while completely on another topic, one of the commentators mentioned when she was in college, “there was a rapist near our college.” Suddenly, I had a rising tide of outrage in myself.

This was coming from the woman on the show who had had an abortion and worked as a counselor for women suffering after an abortion (from an anti-choice perspective, unlike agencies such as Backline and Exhale and independent feminist clinic post-abortion counseling groups). Coming from a woman who was supposed to be anti-choice because she’s pro-woman, I expected more. She mentioned the campus cops escorting women to and from classes and parties, and went back to the topic at hand. The naivete of this woman who counsels other women made me pity her clients.


Let’s put rape into some perspective:

-Rape is sex you don’t agree to, including forcing a body part or object into your vagina, rectum (bottom), or mouth {or a certain sex act that you did not agree to, if you consented to sex- ed.}. Date rape {sometimes called/used interchangeably with acquittance rape, sometimes marital rape depending on the situation; often used interchangeably with “sexual violence”- ed.} is when you are raped by someone you know. Both are crimes. Rape is not about sex – it is an act of power by the rapist and it is always wrong. (from girls.gov)

-Incest is the type of sexual contact that occurs between persons who are so closely related that their marriage is illegal (e.g., parents and children, uncles/aunts and nieces/nephews, etc.). (from RAINN)

-One in three girls and one in six boys are sexually abused before the age of 18.
-14% of women are victims of rape committed by their husband.
-As many as 80% of all assaults involve acquaintances.
(from Rape Victim Advocates)


My activism is framed in a social justice framework, including knowledge from the anti-rape movement. The statement this woman obviously lacked any knowledge of- or perhaps even a dismissal of- the anti-rape movement’s advances. Possibly, there was a serial rapist on or near the campus. Mostly likely, however, there were many males on her campus that felt they had the right to the female’s bodies and to show their control over them (sound familiar?). Stranger Danger may be a good thing to have in the back of your head, but Date Rape, Marital Rape and Incest are unfortunately far, far more common. Stranger Danger serves misogynistic* males in control by keeping women afraid (to be alone, among other things), dependent on familiar males, in a state of constant victimization. And while the other prospects can seem even more terrifying, being in a Stranger Danger mindset stops us from keeping those males (and females) around us from being held accountable, informed, and active in engaging for an anti-sexist culture.

Enforcing a rape culture, even in a simple conversation- an especially in a podcast available for worldwide download-, is not pro-woman. And neither is making women feel bad for the choices they’ve made around pregnancies.