facing up to reality – abortion and slaughter
Most people would agree that humans in general should be thoughtful about their actions and attempt to avoid harm where possible. We shouldn’t continue with traditional practices just because ‘that’s how it’s always been done’ but should meaningfully question the attitudes we take for granted and explore ways of improving life.
I recently passed a group of young and enthusiastic anti-abortion campaigners on the street. Their message was subtle, yet they were obviously affiliated to a religious organisation. They were handing out pictures of 11-week-old foetuses, featuring bullet point development stages. When I questioned the motives behind the leaflet distribution I was told it was simply for information, because most people are not fully aware of the extent to which a foetus is developed at this time. I couldn’t argue with this. I too think it important that people making decisions are fully informed. We would do any woman faced with an unplanned pregnancy a disservice by pretending the contents of her womb are a cluster of random cells at 11 weeks.
However, we also do people a disservice by presenting the information that is only relevant to our position and leaving out vital information about other key areas, such brain development. The fact that at 11 weeks a foetus is not a sentient being was not touched upon in the leaflet. We also do a disservice to society if we allow people to stigmatise a legal procedure and further complicate the difficult choices many women make, especially when the most effective route to cutting down abortion figures is to avoid unwanted pregnancies. Decent sex education and easy access to free contraception are the most logical ways to approach this.
In this spirit of promoting full awareness in all our choices, I have a proposal. Another area where I think people are under-informed is in the sanitised presentation of foodstuffs. I propose that all premises selling the flesh of slaughtered sentient beings, such as supermarkets, butchers and restaurants, provide video presentations of how said sentient beings lived their lives and met their deaths. I don’t think it’s helpful if we hide from the reality of our decisions because it’s unpleasant. If it’s unpleasant and you wouldn’t treat the sentient animals in that way with your own hands, is it acceptable to ignore reality for sake conformity and temporary pleasure? Perhaps it is. But it’s still best to be fully informed.
Oh, i like this idea.
LikeLike
Good! Perhaps you can draw up an action plan and present it to the mayor of Sao Paulo? That would be an acceptable starting point. Don’t wear your shoes for this one though.
LikeLike
It’s this hypocrisy which bothers me: killing sentient animals is “normal”, whilst killing insentient humans is (always) an unspeakable evil. But the most effective measure to reduce abortions is proper use of contraceptions, and hence proper sexual education.
LikeLike
I’m a fan of your 100% sterilisation policy.
LikeLike
I suppose you have read my post on that topic, haven’t you?
LikeLike
Absolutely!
LikeLike
Absolutely. But I think easy access is important too. Given the good they do, and costs they must save, I have no idea why condoms aren’t universally free.
LikeLike
I do not know it either, but like you I am in favour of the free distribution of (female) condoms.
LikeLike
Why specifically female?
LikeLike
Female condoms have several advantages of “normal” condoms, one of those is that they can be inserted hours before actual intercourse. This would give women more control about their reproductive rights. For instance women could use such condoms to prevent becoming pregnant from rape.
LikeLike
What an entirely odd thing to say! “I’ll just pop this condom in in case someone rapes me later on.” Besides which, the guy has to be very careful how he enters for the female condom to be in any way effective. Also, in general, the huge disadvantage they have is that they are less effective than males condoms. Free distribution of all condoms is needed – but we know that everyone will take the male ones because they work better.
LikeLike
Both are examples of how modern technology tends to dehumanize us if we are not careful. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big fan of modern technology which has been an incalculable source of good. But on an individual level we need to be mature and reflect critically on how it changes out lives, and choose intelligently.
In the developed world just sixty or a hundred years ago, no one would have been under any illusions about where meat comes from. He either would have cared for and then slaughtered the animals himself, or had one of his neighbors do it. It is still like that today in most of the world.
The attitude towards sex and children was different: the two went together in people’s minds and you accepted one with the other. The lengths to which women go so their men can enjoy sex and avoid the responsibilities of fatherhood (manipulating her own hormones, inserting IUDs, sterilizations, and when all else fails, abortion) would have seemed bizarre and obsessive a few generations ago.
LikeLike
I find it rather troubling that you see women’s reproductive choices in terms of men and male sexuality. Have you considered that women might be using contraception for their own well being, health and/or pleasure?
If you’ve got the time, dip into the memoirs of Casanova, from the eighteenth century. His writings make it very clear how much women joined in the fun for their own pleasure, and the efforts they went to to de-couple pregnancy and sex.
LikeLike
Of course I understand that women enjoy sex, and have their own motives for wanting to not get pregnant. And of course humans are always tempted to be selfish in their sexual relationships.
But since what dominates in our discussion of these matters tends to be the feminist perspective, I just like to tweak people by pointing out that men not only enjoy the benefits of these technologies, but also use them to manipulate women. There is the claim that these technologies empower women, but you cannot focus only on that and ignore the fact that in real relationships men are simply adjusting their tactics of manipulation.
I have never known a woman to get an abortion because it empowered her. I have known plenty who got abortions because they felt desperately alone, or because their fathers and boyfriends pressured them into it. I know two woman who got sterilized because she wanted to; I’ve known plenty more who got sterilized because their husbands threatened to leave them if they didn’t.
How about instead of entering sexual relationships on the basis of a power struggle and mutual mistrust, we enter them on terms of trust, commitment, and responsibility?
LikeLike
Again, I find your comment troubling. You’re right that people can be selfish etc etc and of course we all want trust, commitment and responsibility. The male perspective is great. Lots of abortions are indeed coerced by men who don’t want to take responsibility.
But women aren’t idiots and these technologies do not exist primarily to let men get their wicked way. And has anybody ever had surgery to be empowered? Except maybe cosmetic surgery. And how does a discussion of abortion lead inevitably to the conclusion that relationships are about power struggles and mistrust?
LikeLike
Glad to see we are in broad agreement on some issues. My basic point is that contraceptive technologies have added new possibilities of manipulation (implying power struggle, mistrust) to relationships.
Because a few generations ago these technologies were less effective and less common, there was a different general cultural attitude towards sex, more oriented to family, more accepting of fertility (and probably laced with some overbearing patriarchy too… no culture is perfect.)
Now, I have a fuzzy feeling (go ahead and laugh) that there is something inferior about the modern approach. There’s something inherently violent not only about abortion, but also the more invasive forms of birth control, and violence is about power and manipulation.
These are half-formed thoughts, so I wont feel offended if you heap scorn on them.
LikeLike
But you are a christian and no matter how you couch your terms this will influence your thinking.
LikeLike
“The lengths to which women go so their men can enjoy sex and avoid the responsibilities of fatherhood (manipulating her own hormones, inserting IUDs, sterilizations, and when all else fails, abortion) would have seemed bizarre and obsessive a few generations ago.”
What an odd perspective you have. I think people from every generation down through history were just as driven by their animal instincts to have sex as we are now. And when sex wasn’t in the context of a breeding or committed relationship they would use whatever was available within their society – be that unhelpful folklore about positions and techniques to avoid pregnancy or the local amateur abortionist. I think that the control we now have over the consequences of sex is something to be celebrated. However, I do agree with you to some extent that it is odd the lengths that women go to to avoid pregnancy, given that penetrative sex isn’t as crucial to them in terms of enjoyment. But then obviously this comes down to taking full control of minimising the chances of pregnancy. I believe that ‘no penetrative sex without a condemn selected and fitted by the women’ is something that should be encouraged – it has the tremendous side benefit of assisting women get rid of idiots before things go any further. Actually I might do a post about that …
And given your discussion about the circumstances of the women you know, further down the thread, I must say I feel sorry for the women and wonder what sort of culture you live in. I expect change is on the horizon.
LikeLike
I do want to congratulate you on a thought-provoking article. Sorry the discussion got so far afield. You might be interested in an American author, Wendell Berry, a farmer / novelist who critiques the levels of artificiality modern people put between themselves and the earth, and therefore alienate themselves from their own humanity. I feel he is too extreme in some ways, but he writes beautifully and is always challenging.
And yes, I freely admit my perspective is odd.
And I live in the most proudly progressive state of the U.S., and this experience has always led me to suspect if what we claim to be progressive isn’t really just some kind of moral racket. “Progressive” around here always ends up being whatever rich people can do to boss everyone else around.
LikeLike
Pingback: One from the vault: The work of Wendell Berry | Truth and Tolerance