American Life League on Feministing Community

It seems the American Life League has discovered the Feministing Community site and, shockingly, isn’t a fan. (Granted, this post was a controversial one – but hey, that’s what community discourse is about!)
Thanks to evilslutopia for the heads up!

and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

56 Comments

  1. allegra
    Posted January 20, 2009 at 12:04 am | Permalink

    I still don’t understand what you’re outraged by, either. I agree (partly) with freethinkr’s post. There is already much theory and some research behind his/her ideas (that the patriarchal family unit mirrors and reinforces patriarchal governments, that the patriarchal family has traditionally been used to keep family money in male heirs’ hands, that women still do a disproportionate amount of the work in marriages, etc.). Try Gerda Lerner’s _The Creation of Patriarchy_. I’ll admit I recommend it to everybody. But it addresses these issues of “family” and the ways both reproduction and family have been oppressive throughout history.
    I actually had a discussion with a woman professor of mine expressing freethinkr’s same reservations. I would rather adopt a child than have one of my own because there truly are so many suffering people on this planet, and I have firsthand experience in my own family with unfit parents and neglected children. But my professor said she thinks it’s not quite the same, that there is indeed something special and wonderful about pregnancy. And I think she’s probably right. Perhaps the urge will hit me someday, as it’s hit many a feminist, including non-hetero ones. It happens. But until then, no babies for me.
    Aside from that, I’m a misanthrope and a cynic. What can I say. It sounds like freethinkr may be, as well (though I of course don’t mean to speak for him).

  2. sapientia paucis
    Posted January 20, 2009 at 12:38 am | Permalink

    I think ALL might want their bloggers to consider whether it’s wise to make statements like, “I know a whole lot of families in the pro-life movement, most of which are very pleased with their state, but are certainly not selfish, wealthy or oppressors of the needy. In fact, quite the contrary is true, as I am sure you would agree, if you are familiar with happy families where there are lots of children and loads of joy” if they plan on lamenting the pervasive “negativity” that leads to all the evils in modern society (you know, divorce, abortion, teenage sex).
    And I can’t even retcon the argument to mean that only the nice anti-choicers are able to avoid these social ills because, hey, my evil liberal parents are still together after twenty-something years, and there’s been plenty of happiness in our family even though I’ve only got one sibling.
    Also, while I don’t want a family for myself, it’s not because I’m a pessimist but because I’m realistic. I can’t stand children and believe that it would be wrong to parent half-heartedly (at best), since kids deserve to be raised in homes where they know that they’re loved and wanted.

  3. Ayla
    Posted January 20, 2009 at 1:29 am | Permalink

    I don’t enjoy children either, but the reason I’m not having them isn’t because I don’t think it would be fair to them. It’s because I don’t want them, and therefore it wouldn’t be fair to me to live a life completely opposite of everything I stand for and want to do.

  4. Rachel
    Posted January 20, 2009 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

    or me “marital relations” and “reproduction” are NOT two words with the same definition.
    Hear, hear! I get so angry whenever I hear bigots guise their personal and often religious objections to gay marriage and thus civil equality by claiming that the purpose of marriage is for procreation, which can only naturally occur between a man and a woman. Issues of adoptive parents aside, my husband and I have no immediate or future plans to have children — is our marriage somehow less valid for it?

  5. Nepenthe
    Posted January 20, 2009 at 2:46 pm | Permalink

    I don’t think you were insincere at all and I’m not trying to make a personal statement about you. Choice-centered feminism, in my opinion, does sweep things under the rug, hence, those advocating it are sweeping important things under the rug (awfully large rug), but I don’t ascribe malicious intent to you or anyone else who adhere to that type of feminism. I apologize if I wrote something that could be construed as personal. I’m not going to defang my ideas to keep from hurting other people’s feelings.

  6. idiolect
    Posted January 20, 2009 at 3:27 pm | Permalink

    And on the “marital relations” thing, isn’t that supposed to be sex, not procreation? Though, yeah, my bad. That, of course, is the same.
    That’s how I read it — and that is really sad. I mean, it sounds like a business transaction, an obligation or occupational duty or something, the way they talk about it.

Feministing In Your Inbox

Sign up for our Newsletter to stay in touch with Feministing
and receive regular updates and exclusive content.

176 queries. 0.583 seconds