In Response to “Abortion medication preferred by some,” published on Feb. 14.
I must express my disappointment at the tone of the piece. Terminology was the main problem, and the effect was devastating. The “morning-after pill,” not the “abortion pill” is how I would have described the subject of the article. The terms used revealed the writer’s values and judgments, and this bias was passed on to the reader. Calling it the “abortion” pill reflects fundamentalist religious, misogynistic views. In this country, that thinking is found in an unholy union of state and fundamentalist church views that regulate laws and ruin women’s lives.
Every child should be a wanted child. The term we use to describe a woman’s option can be an inflammatory, fundamentally religious judgment that condemns in the strongest terms without considering the circumstances, as is the case with the choice of the word “abortion.” On the other hand, although the term “morning-after pill” is not accurate, it reflects the idea of dealing with an unwanted and unplanned pregnancy, whether that is the result of a rape, an incestuous attack on a minor or a stupid decision based on sex for comfort.
This choice of terminology revealing one’s stance on an issue is similar to the choice of terms between “the death penalty” and “capital punishment,” except, in that case, the double standard is clearly revealed. Many religious fundamentalists do not choose to use the words death or murder to describe the execution of a fellow human being at the hands of the state. There is a blind trust that the state is right and that the person deserves it despite a mountain of evidence of wrongful convictions and racial profiling. Those who hold these views also often believe that we should trust our leaders, the country is right to go to war, and patriotism is noble.
So let’s review what we’re asked to do: Trust the men in power who rule and the powers of the state completely and support the mass murder that is war. They know what they’re doing. And let’s not call it murder. Call it “Operation Liberation.” That sounds better. Ignore the fact that some people are making big bucks off the war and disregard the bloodshed. It’s all glorious. How’s that going in Iraq? Not so good?
Trust the men in charge of the penitentiary system, which is a big-bucks business now, when they tell you a person deserves to be murdered, in a jail, officially, by the state. They know what they’re doing. And let’s not call it murder. Let’s call it “Capital Punishment.” That sounds better. And that cures problems, doesn’t it? The number of prisoners is going down because the deterrent works isn’t it? No?
Don’t trust women. Disregard the circumstances and how they may be the victims of rape or abuse and in the worst possible circumstances for raising a child. Oh, women must not be trusted. They’re the murderers. What, there’s no big bucks motivation? But look at all the violence they’ve led us into before. What, none? They’re not peace loving, caring and oppressed people, are they? They are?
Those who condemn women’s power to make the right choice claim they have the interests of children at heart. The state, the church and the mainstream media are all guilty here. They do not promote equality for women and the state does not reach out to provide what women really need: free childcare, free healthcare, free education for children.
What? I’m asking too much? The state can’t afford this? We spend over 50 percent of people’s taxes on the high-profit corporation that is called the military, and its business is mass murder. George Bush does not care about black people, as Kanye West said. He also doesn’t care about women nor does his party. But, boy, they’re good at condemning women. Wittingly or unwittingly, so does your article.
Abortion has its connotations and the ‘See ABORTION, page 3’ at the foot of the front-page article tells us what you are really talking about. The heading changes on page 3 and trivializes the agony of decisions that women have to make: “alternative choice” sounds like “alternative lifestyle.” The article suggests that an operation is easier and the interview with the student who had one does not go into any depth on the circumstances behind the decision nor the aftereffects. In contrast, the comments you chose on the pill talk about fear of the sight of blood and negative aspects. This is misleading.
There are three main problems for women here: the drug companies not providing the pill, lack of education, and negative attitudes from articles from anti-choice groups. It’s not easy to get the pill, and you’re not promoting its advantages here. You could have used this opportunity to rally for freer availability of the morning-after pill and to educate students about the dangers and choices they have when it comes to sex, but you didn’t. So please, choose your terminology carefully before all men look at us as soulless murderers and go figure who is really exploiting the innocent and the oppressed.
-Gail Brady