Pro-choicer: Hollywood abortion portrayal hasn’t changed enough
by Carder
Hollywood has long been reluctant to offer realistic depictions of what it’s like to end a pregnancy, despite the fact that roughly 1 in 3 American women will have an abortion before age 45. When it does summon the courage to address the issue at all, Tinseltown has too often distorted the facts or reverted to misogynist stereotypes — like the helpless damsel or the hysterical mistress.
That’s not to say we haven’t made progress since 1928’s Road to Ruin, one of the first films to include an abortion storyline. In that film, a teenager gets an abortion and subsequently, as a form of cosmic punishment, is mysteriously burned alive in bed.
~ Dionne Scott introducing the “Best & Worst Depictions Of Abortion In TV & Film”, Refinery 29, April 22
Jill Stanek is a nurse turned speaker, columnist and blogger, a national figure in the effort to protect both preborn and postborn innocent human life.
I love how the “worst” films are exponentially more influential than the “best.” Nobody’s seen Obvious Child. Everybody’s seen Knocked Up and Juno.
Both of which make SFLA’s pro-life movie list, by the way: http://studentsforlife.org/pro-life-movies/
I wince, every time the pro-borts quote their “1-in-3” statistic.
Is our culture really that cruel to our women and children?
Do the pro-borts really suck that badly at the “education and contraception” that they believe so firmly in?
Every reader, pro-life and pro-bort, should be shocked at that statistic. Is there really that much abortion going on? We’ve got to get together and do something to reduce this to a reasonable level!
Knocked Up and Juno are good movies.
I’m surprised she put the Grey’s Anatomy abortion on there for “best”. It caused a lot of pain and drama for the character and her husband and helped end their marriage.
I wince, every time the pro-borts quote their “1-in-3? statistic.
Once again, Del, that’s just plain silly. It’s not “pro-choicers’ statistic,” it’s what is true for us all, as Americans. It includes huge numbers of women who before they got pregnant, self-identified as Catholic, fundamentalist Christian, born again, pro-life, etc.
Once the pregnancies were fact, those women felt that having an abortion was the best thing to do. You may not exactly like it, but there it is. It’s not dependent on somebody being in favor of the choice of abortion being legal, it’s what is the truth for all of us.
Jack: Knocked Up and Juno are good movies.
I’ve only seen ‘Juno,’ but yeah – hard for me to see how pro-lifers would be running it down….
Once the pregnancies were fact, those women felt that having an abortion was the best thing to do.
Not necessarily. Maybe her mother or boyfriend decided it was the best thing to do, and pressured/coerced her into it. Maybe Planned Parenthood decided it was the best thing to do when she went to them for options, and they didn’t tell her there were alternatives available.
Talk to women who have had abortions, Doug. http://www.silentnomoreawareness.org/ It’s not that they made a calm, reasoned, rational decision that killing their child was somehow “the best thing to do.” In most cases they were scared, terrified, pressured, coerced, and/or didn’t know what alternatives were available to them.
Doug and Del, the 1-in-3 stat is actually on really shaky ground. It’s based on a study that (1) is hopelessly outdated, and (2) didn’t actually say that one in three women will abort to begin with. More info at http://www.not1in3.com/
“Once the pregnancies were fact, those women felt that having an abortion was the best thing to do.”
JoAnna: Not necessarily. Maybe her mother or boyfriend decided it was the best thing to do, and pressured/coerced her into it. Maybe Planned Parenthood decided it was the best thing to do when she went to them for options, and they didn’t tell her there were alternatives available.
JoAnna, things may be as you describe there, in some cases, but it’s still really all the same thing. Unless somebody is physically compelled to do something, we are talking about a situation where they are choosing to do it, regardless of all the factors they may take into account. If you hold with the notion of free will, that’s the way it is.
I am not for coercion, think it bad, wish it did not happen. Some women have philosophical positions where I believe they are really not suited to having an abortion, where they will regret it, on balance, in the long run, and I would advise those women not to have abortions, myself. It is still what they want (again, short of physical compulsion otherwise) and if they want to please their mother, for example and per what you said, then so be it. Nobody is guaranteeing their choice; it’s up to them. Free will.
Silentnomore has 1858 stories from US women who regret having an abortion. Okay, no argument there. However, in no way is this representative of what most women experience. Granted that not every regretful woman has told her story there, but we are talking about a time span when 40,000,000 or more abortions have been done in the US. By far, most women end up glad, on balance, that they had the abortion, and would do the same thing again in similar circumstances.
Kelsey: Doug and Del, the 1-in-3 stat is actually on really shaky ground.
So, do we need to go and beat Dionne Scott with a styrofoam baseball bat?
Kelsey, I agree that the figures have been declining. I remember when it was 40%. Not long ago, the “1 in 3” (or 33%) looked a little too high, too – it was more like 30%.
not1in3.com makes big noise over the latest figures, and if they continue like that in subsequent years then the rate/expectancy would continue to decline.
2012 information should be out soon, and that will give another set of clues.
Oh good gosh Doug. So if a 16 year old pregnant girl who wants her baby is told by her father and step mother that if she doesn’t have an abortion she will be homeless, then that abortion would be of her free will?
That is some twisted logic.
So if a 16 year old pregnant girl who wants her baby is told by her father and step mother that if she doesn’t have an abortion she will be homeless, then that abortion would be of her free will?
That is some twisted logic.
Sharon, yes – she’s still doing what she wants to do the most, from among her available options. (Unless it’s purely and totally random, this is how we all make our choices, it’s how human motivation works.) She more wants to avoid being homeless, in your example, than she wants to not have the abortion (if indeed she chooses to have the abortion).
There is obvious coercion at work, here, on the part of her father and step mother, and I don’t think anybody will say that’s a good thing. We don’t always have perfect choices available or even good ones.
Doug, do you know what “coercion” means? It’s when someone is being pressured to do the OPPOSITE of what they want to do. So no, someone who is being forced or coerced is not “doing what she wants to do the most.”
Unless the coercion is to keep the pregnancy. Then it’s all roses and sunshine and the parents know best.
“Unless the coercion is to keep the pregnancy. Then it’s all roses and sunshine and the parents know best.”
No, then it’s just a matter of the baby’s right to life trumping any claim the mother could have on an abortion. The situation is far from “roses and sunshine” but still better than killing a baby.
The laws against murder in our society clearly show that the government has a vested interest in “coercing” people not to kill one another. Do you think that is bad, Kat? Do you support repealing all laws that prohibit murder, since that is “coercion”?
Thanks, JoAnna. You made the point more clearly than I did.
JoAnna: Doug, do you know what “coercion” means? It’s when someone is being pressured to do the OPPOSITE of what they want to do. So no, someone who is being forced or coerced is not “doing what she wants to do the most.”
You’re not really addressing what I said, JoAnna, and either you’re not reading closely enough at all, or else you purposely left out the part about not just doing what she wants the most, i.e.”from among her available options.”
Of course I know what coercion means. In Sharon’s example, the girl was getting coerced.
Nobody is saying the “perfect” choice will always be available. Nobody is saying that we “get to do what we want the most, in a perfect world” necessarily. As with so many things, it’s relative.
What I said is true, however, and it covers everything, whether or not coercion is involved, whether we are struck dumb by the plethora of great choices, or we are in dismay because none of the options are attractive. We’re still going to go with what we desire the most, regardless of how overall good or bad our range of choices is. It all goes to desire.
I don’t “love cleaning toilets,” but I will still, on occasion, clean a toilet because I want it to be clean more than I want to leave it dirty (even though that would get me out of cleaning the darn thing).
To summarize: We choose that which we want the most, or that for which we have the least distaste, from among our available options.
Doug, if a woman killed her newborn because it was the option that gave her the least distaste from among her available options, would that make it right? Would you champion her decision?
JoAnna, no, and no. (Although here we have moved from the motivation for the action to other people’s opinions of it.)
Why not, Doug?
JoAnna, I see no reason that the woman could have, there, that I would think is good enough, not even close. If killing the newborn is what she favors, then I’d say, “totally unfit mother,” and the kid gets taken from her.
I think that aware beings should not be killed, not have their stuff taken, etc., barring a compelling reason to do so. I don’t want to be killed or have my stuff stolen, and I accept the idea of the “social contract” where we all limit our actions with respect to others, just as we want others to behave toward us.
I’m not saying our system is perfect, but in general I’m happy with it. The newborn is a person under that system, perhaps a citizen, and has had rights accorded to it. The mother isn’t allowed to kill the kid, and the kid gets taken away.
Yes Hollywood!!
Start cranking out those happy abortion movies!! Please do your part in writing those scripts that show aborting women as happy, healthy, whole and empowered!! Show them strong! Always yapping in their euphemistic way about “choice” and “reproductive rights” and “terminating” and “justice!!” Let them crow loud and clear that killing their babies is GOOD and RIGHT and JUSTIFIED!!
And whatever you do don’t mention the central character. The baby that is killed. Cause that part is such a bummer. :(
GO HOLLYWOOD!!!
YOU GOT THIS!!!
Good grief Doug.
Still at it??
Coerced and forced abortion is against the law. There are states right now that will be passing prolife legislation to file charges of child abuse if parents coerce/force their teenage daughters to abort against their wills. Abortionists will have to screen these girls to make sure they are FREE from force or coercion and will by LAW be charged if they abort against a young woman’s will. Abortion mills will have to screen each young person to make sure they are acting of their own accord.
http://thejusticefoundation.org/cafa/
Do your homework.
Coerced and forced abortion is against the law. There are states right now that will be passing prolife legislation to file charges of child abuse if parents coerce/force their teenage daughters to abort against their wills. Abortionists will have to screen these girls to make sure they are FREE from force or coercion and will by LAW be charged if they abort against a young woman’s will. Abortion mills will have to screen each young person to make sure they are acting of their own accord.
Carla, I have not seen anybody on Jill’s blog say they are for coercion – at least not coercion to have an abortion (I’m not so sure about coercion to continue a pregnancy) – for months, anyway.