This semester has been a fast-track process and throughout the process we have learned about many inspirational social movements. From the women's movement to gay liberation movement, I think it is safe to say, we are all officially experts on social movements. In addition to learning about different social movements, we have all diligently worked on research for a social movement of our choosing. For me, the pro-life v. pro-choice social movement has put me on a roller coaster of emotions. With that being said, for my final opinion, I will state that I am a pro-life supporter, however, the pro-both movement makes a compelling argument! As the articles posted below will demonstrate, abortions, specifically late term abortions are wrong. This debate is not entirely black and white and neither is my opinion. The high amount of abortions performed in the United States is a bi-product of several factors. First, contraceptive use needs to be more accessible for people, especially young people. Furthermore, a more comprehensive sex-education must be administered to the youth of this nation immediately! A more current debate covered on all major news stations is the Health Care reform debate. Much controversy followed after the Senate voted to prohibit (as current law already states) federal subsides to find abortions. Furthermore, universal health care will not cover abortion expenses. The legislation addresses the concerns of the majority of Americans that do not want their tax dollars spent to fund abortions.
Addressing the abortion debate is not as simple as either making abortions legal or illegal. While most states ban late-term abortions, some still see these procedures as legal. Enraged by doctors who perform such procedures, one extremist was driven to murder Dr. George Tiller. There has to be some common ground that will make the majority happy. There will always be extremists on each side of the abortion debate. The most informative resource (and resource I could relate to) was the "pro-both" movement. The pro-both movement seeks to reduce the amount of abortions performed annually, yet wants to provide women with resources in the event of extreme circumstances (rape, incest, health risk, etc). Additionally, the pro-both movement is rooted in two viewpoints 1)that our society must seek to make abortion a rarity and 2)society must not infringe on a women's right to control her reproductive choices. This may appear to be conflicting principles, however, the pro-both movement argues that as a society we must work to prevent unplanned pregnancies rather than condoning abortions as a substitution to birth control.
Both the pro-life and pro-choice movements are valid in their arguments. Pro-choice supporters feel that women have a right to choose what happens to their bodies. Further, they do not see a fetus as human life therefore, abortion is not murder. Pro-life supporters see life as beginning at conception and ending at natural death. Any obstruction to an unborn fetus is murder. Both sides have contrasting interests while the pro-both movement seeks to find a middle ground.
Friday, January 15, 2010
Article #5: Late Term Abortions
Following the death of Dr. George Tiller, late-term abortion provider, a doctor in the state of Nebraska has hired on two of Dr. Tiller’s associates in hopes of continuing late-term abortion procedures. The clinic in Nebraska often performs abortions on babies that could potentially survive outside of the womb. Groups and organizations that opposed the work of Dr. George Tiller are turning their energy towards the Nebraska clinic. Dr. Carhart, a doctor at the Nebraska clinic feels the same obligation towards helping women abort unintended pregnancies, however, state law in Nebraska has clear regulations and restrictions on abortions. No woman can undergo an abortion procedure after the fetus has clearly reached viability, except when the mother’s life is in danger.
Dr. Carhart has performed abortions since the 1970s and has no intention of stopping anytime in the near future. Following Dr. Tiller’s death, Dr. Carhart offered to run Dr. Tiller's clinic, however, the Tiller family made a decision to close one of only three late-term abortion clinics in the county. While Dr. Carhart will not disclose how late in a pregnancy he is willing to perform an abortion, Dr. Tiller noted publically that he would perform abortions up to 23 weeks and perhaps later depending on consultation with the clinic.
Writer Monica Davey had her article published in the New York Times and while the article appears to be unbiased, Davey learns more towards pro-life. By disclosing evidence that doctors such as Dr. Carhart and Dr. Tiller perform abortions so late in a pregnancy, Davey is persuading the reader that this is morally wrong.
The below video shows a protest at Dr. Carhart’s clinic. Both pro-choice and pro-life supports were present at the protest:
A website dedicated to informing people on late term abortions offers readers further information on this topic. There are three different types of late-term or partial birth abortions. The first and most popularly known procedure is called D&E (Dilation and Evacuation). In this procedure, the fetus is removed by inserting forceps into the uterus and then separates the fetus into pieces. Once the fetus has been separated, each piece is removed one at a time. Then a vacuum is inserted to ensure no remains are left intact . The second known procedure is an early-induced labor.
This procedure is very painful for the mother and rarely used. The third procedure is called intact D&X surgery. This procedure extends over 2-3 days while the cervix is dilated. Once the cervix has been dilated, the doctor pulls the fetus out feet first leaving the head inside the mother. Forceps are then used to puncture the skull and extract the brain tissue and the baby is then removed.
For additional information please view: http://www.allaboutlifechallenges.org/late-term-abortion.htm
Article: http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T8322733799&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T8322735604&cisb=22_T8322735603&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6742&docNo=1
Dr. Carhart has performed abortions since the 1970s and has no intention of stopping anytime in the near future. Following Dr. Tiller’s death, Dr. Carhart offered to run Dr. Tiller's clinic, however, the Tiller family made a decision to close one of only three late-term abortion clinics in the county. While Dr. Carhart will not disclose how late in a pregnancy he is willing to perform an abortion, Dr. Tiller noted publically that he would perform abortions up to 23 weeks and perhaps later depending on consultation with the clinic.
Writer Monica Davey had her article published in the New York Times and while the article appears to be unbiased, Davey learns more towards pro-life. By disclosing evidence that doctors such as Dr. Carhart and Dr. Tiller perform abortions so late in a pregnancy, Davey is persuading the reader that this is morally wrong.
The below video shows a protest at Dr. Carhart’s clinic. Both pro-choice and pro-life supports were present at the protest:
A website dedicated to informing people on late term abortions offers readers further information on this topic. There are three different types of late-term or partial birth abortions. The first and most popularly known procedure is called D&E (Dilation and Evacuation). In this procedure, the fetus is removed by inserting forceps into the uterus and then separates the fetus into pieces. Once the fetus has been separated, each piece is removed one at a time. Then a vacuum is inserted to ensure no remains are left intact . The second known procedure is an early-induced labor.
This procedure is very painful for the mother and rarely used. The third procedure is called intact D&X surgery. This procedure extends over 2-3 days while the cervix is dilated. Once the cervix has been dilated, the doctor pulls the fetus out feet first leaving the head inside the mother. Forceps are then used to puncture the skull and extract the brain tissue and the baby is then removed.
For additional information please view: http://www.allaboutlifechallenges.org/late-term-abortion.htm
Article: http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T8322733799&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T8322735604&cisb=22_T8322735603&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6742&docNo=1
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Article #4: Abortion as Birth Control
Are girls using abortions as a form of birth control? According to writer Beezy Marsh, some young women are experiencing as many as 4 abortions by their 18th birthdays. Out of 19,000 girls who underwent an abortion procedure last year, for 1,500 of them, this was not their first. Furthermore, in an extreme case, one girl was on her 8th abortion! Due to government secrecy regarding abortion information, the exact details are often kept undocumented in public records.
Why are young girls so seemingly carefree about the idea of having an abortion? Marsh suggests that for many of these young women, abortion is not seen as a traumatic event, but rather a routine option of ridding themselves of an unplanned or unintended pregnancy. Marsh further suggests that this type of behavior is a response to the failures of contraceptive services to young people. For some young women, going on birth control is not an option and risk becoming pregnant due to unprotected sexual activities. The risks are not limited to unplanned pregnancies. For many young men and women, the risk for contracting sexually transmitted infections is present.
These girls are not the majority of women. In fact, most women who experience an abortion attempt to make sure they do not find themselves in the same situation. Suggestions that could help these young women are offered in this article such as better access to birth control and addressing other issues that may be present in the girls’ lives.
Additional sources offer a response to “abortion as birth control.” Contacept.org is an organization combating the use of abortion as a substitute for contraception. Many women are utilizing abortion in the event that they improperly used contraception or in some cases, no contraceptive use was used at all. This organization offers some statistics on women seeking abortions and birth control:
1) 46% did not use contraception during the month they became pregnant
2) 8% never used a method of birth control
3) 47% had at least one previous abortion
This website also offers reasons women give for having an abortion:
1) 75% of women said that having a baby would interfere with work, school or other responsibilities
2) 75% said they cannot afford a child
3) 50% noted that they do not want to be a single parent or that they are experiencing problems with their partner
Women using abortion as a means of birth control are at risk for many other health concerns such as, reproductive tract infections, HIV/AIDS, future reproductive problems. The risks associated with abortions include: complications to cervical laceration, hemorrhaging, pain, infection, and emotional distress.
http://www.contracept.org/abortifacient.php
Article: http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T8315690486&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=76&resultsUrlKey=29_T8315690489&cisb=22_T8315690488&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=138794&docNo=76
Article #3: The Stupak Amendemnt
“What My Amendment Won’t Do,” is an article written by Bart Stupak, Democratic representative from Michigan. His article informs readers of how the Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitt amendment in the House health care reform bill will and will not affect Americans. First he claims that the amendment maintains current law and the status quo. The Hyde amendment, passed 33 years ago, prohibits federal money to fund abortions, however, the law does not limit private insurance companies from offering plans that do cover abortions. Stupak argues that this new amendment, Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitt, would not change current legislation. Women receiving money from the federal government are prohibited from using that money to fund an abortion. These women can obtain an abortion from a private facility and use their own money. In no way, would this amendment make obtaining an abortion more difficult for women according to Stupak. Further, Stupak argues that the majority of Americans do not want their tax dollars spent to fund abortions and the house should maintain laws preventing such action. Stupak also notes that he encourages Congress to develop a health care plan that will offer health insurance to more Americans, although urges Congress to maintain its stance on federal funding for abortions.
Stupak is indeed persuasive in his article. He informs his reader that the new amendment will not change access to abortions. He feels the Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitt amendment is a win-win for both pro-choice and pro-life supporters. Although I he evades answering how private insurance companies will respond to the amendment, he does offer a comprehensive response that will hopefully answer many of the questions those opposing the amendment have.
The health care reform proposal has sparked controversy on numerous levels, however, abortion appears to be one of the leading areas of debate. For decades, women (and men) in the United States have fought hard to earn the right to make choices to their own bodies. Many women view the Stupak amendment as a huge regression. Laws passed at the federal level creating greater restriction on abortions will affect millions of women. Many will argue that abortions are still covered under private insurance plans. Pro-choice supporters argue that by prohibiting federal funding can lead to greater hardships for women seeking an abortion.
Planned Parenthood, a pro-choice organization, offers a different perspective. As an organization, they feel this amendment would ultimately create many barriers for women in need of an abortion. Women would need to maintain two different types of health insurance coverage, one that covers abortions and one that covers everything else. Please view the Planned Parenthood video below for a brief synopsis of the hardships this amendment, or others similar to it, could potentially create if passed.
Another interesting article I located regarding private insurance companies and abortion policies notes that currently, 5 states restrict insurance coverage of abortion in private insurance plants and 4 limit coverage to cases when the life of the mother is at risk.
Here are a few other highlights from the article:
1) 12 states restrict abortion coverage in insurance plans for public employees
2) 3 of the states provide abortion coverage only when the woman’s life in endangered
3) 2 of the states flatly prohibit any insurance coverage of abortion for public employees
For additional information here in the link to the article: www.guttmacher.org/pubs/spib_RICA.pdf
Article: http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T8305791991&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=26&resultsUrlKey=29_T8305791994&cisb=22_T8305791993&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6742&docNo=43
Additional Sources:
http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/healthreform/?gclid=CP227_KppZ8CFR4Eagod-gqfmQ
Stupak is indeed persuasive in his article. He informs his reader that the new amendment will not change access to abortions. He feels the Stupak-Ellsworth-Pitt amendment is a win-win for both pro-choice and pro-life supporters. Although I he evades answering how private insurance companies will respond to the amendment, he does offer a comprehensive response that will hopefully answer many of the questions those opposing the amendment have.
The health care reform proposal has sparked controversy on numerous levels, however, abortion appears to be one of the leading areas of debate. For decades, women (and men) in the United States have fought hard to earn the right to make choices to their own bodies. Many women view the Stupak amendment as a huge regression. Laws passed at the federal level creating greater restriction on abortions will affect millions of women. Many will argue that abortions are still covered under private insurance plans. Pro-choice supporters argue that by prohibiting federal funding can lead to greater hardships for women seeking an abortion.
Planned Parenthood, a pro-choice organization, offers a different perspective. As an organization, they feel this amendment would ultimately create many barriers for women in need of an abortion. Women would need to maintain two different types of health insurance coverage, one that covers abortions and one that covers everything else. Please view the Planned Parenthood video below for a brief synopsis of the hardships this amendment, or others similar to it, could potentially create if passed.
Another interesting article I located regarding private insurance companies and abortion policies notes that currently, 5 states restrict insurance coverage of abortion in private insurance plants and 4 limit coverage to cases when the life of the mother is at risk.
Here are a few other highlights from the article:
1) 12 states restrict abortion coverage in insurance plans for public employees
2) 3 of the states provide abortion coverage only when the woman’s life in endangered
3) 2 of the states flatly prohibit any insurance coverage of abortion for public employees
For additional information here in the link to the article: www.guttmacher.org/pubs/spib_RICA.pdf
Article: http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T8305791991&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=26&resultsUrlKey=29_T8305791994&cisb=22_T8305791993&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=6742&docNo=43
Additional Sources:
http://www.plannedparenthoodaction.org/healthreform/?gclid=CP227_KppZ8CFR4Eagod-gqfmQ
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Article #2: Ultrasound Prior to Abortion
In a recent article posted January 7, 2010 writer Zach Krajacic attempts to persuade readers that a law enforcing women contemplating abortion to view an ultrasound of an abortion would significantly decrease the amount of abortions performed annually. Abby Johnson, director of Planned Parenthood in Texas, resigned from her position after viewing an ultrasound of an abortion. Krajacic feels that other women would have a similar response if they were placed in the same position as Johnson. By implementing this type of law would hopefully better inform mothers of what an abortion actually entails. Krajacic claims that many women considering abortion see the procedure as removing growing tissue rather than a procedure that indeed ends life. After viewing an abortion procedure, many women choose to continue with their pregnancy. While the law would not ban abortions, hopes of the new law would ideally decrease the amount of abortions performed every year.
Zrajacic is quite persuasive in his article noting the following reasons for success of this law:
1) Even Pro-Choice advocates are for the reduction in number of abortions performed annually
2) Abortion would still be legal and not limit a woman’s right to choose
3) Allow women to make more informed decisions prior to abortion
Many states have adapted laws that require abortion providers to grant the opportunity of an ultrasound for the woman considering an abortion. Additionally, Republicans have presented a bill to Congress that would require all abortion clinics to complete an ultrasound. Although this bill has not been passed, as Krajacic states, it is a step in the right direction. Krajacic argues that a law such as this would benefit both pro-life and pro-choice supporters. The law would reduce the amount of abortions, yet abortion would still remain an option for women facing an unintended pregnancy.
There are similar laws that would force women to either view an ultrasound of their unborn child or abandon the option of abortion. I’ve included some links to several websites describing how these laws affect women. In August of 2009, Oklahoma overturned a law passed the prior year that required doctors to perform an ultrasound and describe the fetus to the mother prior to abortion. If the woman refused the ultrasound she would be prohibited from having an abortion.
http://community.feministing.com/2009/08/oklahoma-overturns-abortion-la.html
In our own state, Arizona, recent change in abortion laws will affect the lives of women. Below is a list of new abortion laws signed by Governor Jan Brewer.
HB 2400: creates a state ban on partial birth abortions so local prosecutors can make sure the federal partial-birth abortion ban can be better enforced.
HB 2564: would protect women, parents, children, and the civil rights of health care providers.
That legislation calls for informed consent before abortions along with a 24-hour waiting period, parental consent requirements, a prohibition on non-doctors doing surgical abortions, and of conscience for all health care providers, including pharmacists, on abortion and abortion drugs.
SB 1175: a bill to ban non-physicians from doing abortions in the state -- important because a nurse at Planned Parenthood has been putting women's health at risk by doing surgical abortions.
http://www.lifenews.com/state4295.html
Article: http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T8305036836&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T8305036843&cisb=22_T8305036842&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=7945&docNo=1
Zrajacic is quite persuasive in his article noting the following reasons for success of this law:
1) Even Pro-Choice advocates are for the reduction in number of abortions performed annually
2) Abortion would still be legal and not limit a woman’s right to choose
3) Allow women to make more informed decisions prior to abortion
Many states have adapted laws that require abortion providers to grant the opportunity of an ultrasound for the woman considering an abortion. Additionally, Republicans have presented a bill to Congress that would require all abortion clinics to complete an ultrasound. Although this bill has not been passed, as Krajacic states, it is a step in the right direction. Krajacic argues that a law such as this would benefit both pro-life and pro-choice supporters. The law would reduce the amount of abortions, yet abortion would still remain an option for women facing an unintended pregnancy.
There are similar laws that would force women to either view an ultrasound of their unborn child or abandon the option of abortion. I’ve included some links to several websites describing how these laws affect women. In August of 2009, Oklahoma overturned a law passed the prior year that required doctors to perform an ultrasound and describe the fetus to the mother prior to abortion. If the woman refused the ultrasound she would be prohibited from having an abortion.
http://community.feministing.com/2009/08/oklahoma-overturns-abortion-la.html
In our own state, Arizona, recent change in abortion laws will affect the lives of women. Below is a list of new abortion laws signed by Governor Jan Brewer.
HB 2400: creates a state ban on partial birth abortions so local prosecutors can make sure the federal partial-birth abortion ban can be better enforced.
HB 2564: would protect women, parents, children, and the civil rights of health care providers.
That legislation calls for informed consent before abortions along with a 24-hour waiting period, parental consent requirements, a prohibition on non-doctors doing surgical abortions, and of conscience for all health care providers, including pharmacists, on abortion and abortion drugs.
SB 1175: a bill to ban non-physicians from doing abortions in the state -- important because a nurse at Planned Parenthood has been putting women's health at risk by doing surgical abortions.
http://www.lifenews.com/state4295.html
Article: http://www.lexisnexis.com.ezproxy1.lib.asu.edu/us/lnacademic/results/docview/docview.do?docLinkInd=true&risb=21_T8305036836&format=GNBFI&sort=RELEVANCE&startDocNo=1&resultsUrlKey=29_T8305036843&cisb=22_T8305036842&treeMax=true&treeWidth=0&csi=7945&docNo=1
Article #1: Murder of Dr. Tiller (late-term abortion provider)
A man standing trail for first-degree murder feels justified in his actions. Scott Roeder of Kansas City, Missouri is charged with one count of first-degree murder and an additional two counts of aggravated assault. The victim is Dr. George Tiller, a man who performs late term abortions.One of only three clinics in the nation that provides 3rd trimester abortion, Dr. Tiller has been receiving threats for decades. While Roeder claims to be protecting innocent life he took the life of a doctor. Most pro-life organizations see innocent life, all life, as needing protection. Many pro-life supporters see the moment of conception to the moment of natural death as the standard, so by Roeder maliciously murdering Dr. Tiller contradicts every moral the pro-life movement stands for. Roeder has absolutely no regrets for his actions, in fact, he feels he was serving the public's interest. In an interview with AP, Roeder stated:
"No, I don't have any regrets because I have been told so far at least four women have changed their minds, that I know of, and have chosen to have the baby," Roeder said. "So even if one changed her mind it would be worth it. No, I don't have any regrets."
Roeder felt as though he had an obligation to protect the life of unborn children. For Dr. Tiller, his untimely death was not the first attempt to cease late term abortions at his clinic. In 1993, Tiller was shot in both arms and prior to this, in 1986, his clinic was bombed. Following Tiller’s death, Roeder confessed to the murder.
The article was located on Foxnews.com and as a conservative news station, I felt the article did little to shame and denounce Roeder’s actions. On several occasions, the article quotes comments implying that Roeder’s actions were heroic-like, not the murderer he truly is. Although, when commenting on Tiller’s close family’s response to the murder, they note that family sees Roeder as a terrorist.
Time.com offers a more emotional approach when covering the story of Scott Roeder. Author Nancy Gibbs begins her article stating how organizations that support abortion rights such as Planned Parenthood and National Abortion Federation have issued statements condemning Roeder and his violent response to Dr. Tiller’s actions. Executive director of American Life League stated, “Pro-lifers by our nature and commitment to human rights reject violence as a means of resistance” (www.time.com )
Please take a moment and watch the video below. Democracy Now! brings together many experts to comment on life and murder of Dr. Tiller. This video further elaborates on the work of Dr. Tiller and further coverage of his murder. Dr. Tiller was not the first abortion provider killed in this pro-life v. pro-choice debate.
Original article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,573426,00.html
Additional sources: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1902120,00.html
"No, I don't have any regrets because I have been told so far at least four women have changed their minds, that I know of, and have chosen to have the baby," Roeder said. "So even if one changed her mind it would be worth it. No, I don't have any regrets."
Roeder felt as though he had an obligation to protect the life of unborn children. For Dr. Tiller, his untimely death was not the first attempt to cease late term abortions at his clinic. In 1993, Tiller was shot in both arms and prior to this, in 1986, his clinic was bombed. Following Tiller’s death, Roeder confessed to the murder.
The article was located on Foxnews.com and as a conservative news station, I felt the article did little to shame and denounce Roeder’s actions. On several occasions, the article quotes comments implying that Roeder’s actions were heroic-like, not the murderer he truly is. Although, when commenting on Tiller’s close family’s response to the murder, they note that family sees Roeder as a terrorist.
Time.com offers a more emotional approach when covering the story of Scott Roeder. Author Nancy Gibbs begins her article stating how organizations that support abortion rights such as Planned Parenthood and National Abortion Federation have issued statements condemning Roeder and his violent response to Dr. Tiller’s actions. Executive director of American Life League stated, “Pro-lifers by our nature and commitment to human rights reject violence as a means of resistance” (www.time.com )
Please take a moment and watch the video below. Democracy Now! brings together many experts to comment on life and murder of Dr. Tiller. This video further elaborates on the work of Dr. Tiller and further coverage of his murder. Dr. Tiller was not the first abortion provider killed in this pro-life v. pro-choice debate.
Original article: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,573426,00.html
Additional sources: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1902120,00.html
Roe v. Wade
I wanted to share this with the class. I was up watching television last night and this commercial aired. As a women studies minor, I learned early on how important the Roe. v. Wade supreme court ruling is to women and other pro-choice activists. In 1973, abortion was deemed legal. Watch this video as a woman ("Jane Roe"), who changed U.S. history, now supports PRO-LIFE! Very interesting. Thoughts?
Opinion Assignment #3
Klein argues in her article that activism today is far different from grassroots organizations of the past. Considering the many social movements we have followed this semester such as, the women’s movement, the civil rights movement and the anti-war movement, I would absolutely agree with her assessment. To quote Bob Dylan, “The times they are a changin’,” and as we evolve as a society of people, so will our social movement strategies. Further, it has become increasingly easier for young people to “log-on”, accessorize, and attend concerts in hopes of creating change, when in reality, the most essential element of social movements is absent, personal involvement! My opinion of whether historical social movements are more effective than current ones is that, yes, grassroots organizations had more of an influence and likelihood of creating change. My intention is not to discredit current social movements, such as the ones referenced by Klein, (WTO protests & Live Aid) as these movements have utilized different outlets in order to create change, however, an essential element seems to have disappeared over time, a sense of personal commitment and dedication.
As we have read this semester, grassroots organizations have placed themselves in lines of fire in hopes of creating change. During the anti-war movement, young protesters were killed during the Kent State protest. On May 4, 1970 students of Kent State University joined together to protest the United States’ invasion of Cambodia. The crowd exceeded 1500 protestors hoping to have their voices heard that they would no longer stand for such an invasion. In response, Ohio National Guard fired 67 shots in less than 13 seconds killing four students and wounding an additional nine students (http://www.may4.org/4.html). I use this example to stress the level of risk members of the anti-war movement faced as a result of their participation in the anti-war movement. Klein argues that for many current social movements, protestors have turned to technology to have their voices heard. “The rise in blogging and on-line protests has taken the heat out of direct action. It’s safer to mouth off in a blog than put your body on the line” (Klein, 2007). Had the students of Kent state turned to a blog or other technological device, rather than physical protest, yes they would most likely be alive today, however, their impact on the anti-war movement would have been a fleeting bleep on the social movement radar. Instead, we remember the lives that were lost that day and the change their ultimate sacrifice created.
The Freedom Riders are another example of personal sacrifice for the betterment of social movement in creating change. On May 4, 1961 the first freedom ride took place. Seven blacks and six whites pursued change by riding two public buses headed for the deep south. By the second week of the ride, individuals involved in the protest were brutally assaulted, however, the violence these protestors experienced was not enough to stop them. The riders trudged on. Eventually, many of them even experienced jail sentences as a result of their involvement with the protest. Their work was not in vain, the following fall the Interstate Commerce Commission issued rules prohibiting segregation on public transportation. These individuals, willing to sacrifice their bodies and freedoms, were responsible for the change in public transportation laws. Without this type of commitment, and other similar protests, perhaps we all may be riding segregated buses, drinking from segregated fountains, and only see like-races in our schools (http://www.core-online.org/History/freedom%20rides.htm ).
Corporate America’s influence on social movements has been a key factor in shifting the element of personal involvement in social movements. As Klein alluded to in her article, companies such as American Express, Converse, Armani, and Apple sell “red-branded” products with a small percentage of profits dedicated to a specific cause. At this point of the reading, I was interested in researching a little deeper in this area. I first arrived at Apple’s website stating, “Play more than music, play a part” (http://www.apple.com/ipod/red/). By purchasing an iPod or other “red” products, 50 percent of the gross profit is then donated to the Global fund to help fund AIDS programs. What companies are creating is a detachment from personal involvement from social movements. Furthermore, companies such as Apple and American Express are asking us to buy more stuff! I find this particularly ironic considering that much of the money contributed from product red is going to countries such as Africa, where many citizens cannot afford running water. Large corporations are encouraging Americans to spend more money and consume more materialistic good while slapping a “do-gooder” label on the marketing scheme. It would be quite interesting to find how these companies have actually put more profit to their bottom lines while claiming to be helping others.
.
http://www.may4.org/4.html
http://www.apple.com/ipod/red/).
http://www.core-online.org/History/freedom%20rides.htm
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Text-based Assignment #3: part 2
While both the environmental and animal rights movements have been heavily influenced by media presence, I feel as though the gay liberation movement must be addressed in this post. The NO H8 campaign has been prevalent in part because of California rejecting the right for gays to marry. After further research of this campaign many would be surprised to know that the co-founders, Jeff Parshley and Adam Bouska, are fashion photographers. Both moved to the southern California area to pursue careers in photography. Just as Jerry Rubin quickly learned that by playing the role, he could make the news, these co-founders “play the role” of figureheads of the gay liberation movement (Gitlin 2009). Many of their tactics include working with celebrities wearing a NO H8 logo. Both Parshley and Bouska are in their twenties and are active members in gay liberation, however, I would question how the media has changed their image and thus involvement in the movement.
The observer has turned into the observed. Looking at gay liberation movement, environmental movement, and animal rights movement, it becomes clear how much of a crucial role the media plays in perpetuating a certain image of each movement. The media then presents this image to the public. The public, or masses, see a very limited view of the media’s representation of a social movement. People may view a PETA ad of a nude celebrity in protest to animal cruelty and believe this is what the movement stands for. What the media most often fails to recognize are the true members of a movement attempting to make a change. Often the face of a movement, or a celebrity, does not share the same fundamental interests as original members and as a result the movement’s message become blurred between reality and image.
http://www.noh8campaign.com/
Monday, January 11, 2010
Text-based Assignment #3: part 1
When beginning the Gitlin’s chapter, “The Media in the Unmaking of the New Left,” I had an idea of what this particular quote (“The observer changed the position of the observed”) meant, however, after reading the article, I believe I have a different understanding. Last semester I enrolled in a class titled, “Justice and Pop Culture.” Interested in what I would learn throughout the course of the semester, I was intrigued after the very first class. I was informed that I was media obsessed! We all are. It would be nearly impossible not to be influenced by the media on a day-to-day basis. From billboards to clothing logos, every one of us, without exception, are influenced by the media. With this being said, the media has changed the position of the observer into the observed. Gitlin (2009) states, “The media were far from mirrors passively reflecting facts found in the real world, true: out there among others. The media reflection was more the active, patterned remaking performed by mirrors in a fun house” (334). What Gitlin is attempting to stress here is that the media chooses what story, or truth, to represent. Is the media merely “re-presenting” the facts, or choosing how to manipulate its audience towards a particular ideological perspective? Looking at the SDS and the difference between original and new members, detecting the media’s influence on the anti-war movement was undeniable. The media played a pivotal role in shaping the image of a newer generation of members. New members saw a certain “truth” depicted by the mirrors of media, flocked protests and rushed to become leaders within the movement.
Looking at social movements, specifically the ones we have covered throughout this course, I immediately thought of two movements that are heavily influenced by the media: the Environmental Movement and the Animal Rights Movement, more specifically, PETA. Rarely does a day go by where I am not bombarded by some form of eco-friendly media representation. From fashion to automobiles to trendy alternative grocery stores, the media has amplified becoming a “green” do-gooder. Even celebrities have jumped on the bandwagon. This is not to say that becoming environmentally conscious is a bad thing, it most certainly is not. The problem here is what Gitlin alluded to in his article; the publicizing of social movements via media outlets has created dissonance between the base of the movement (the political agenda, goals, aspirations) and the image displayed by the media, thus, new recruits and future of the movement as a whole. The environmental movement has many “performing leaders,” or celebrities, as Gitlin states. This is not limited to celebrity faces such as John Travolta, Chris Martin, or Brad and Angelina. Presidential candidates often take a great interest in global warming and other environmental concerns only to be later drawn out and little is done. Or in the event that a movement figurehead seeks the movement’s media presence as an opportunity to push his or her own agenda. The media facilitates this type of illusion to the masses, as Gitlin (2009) states, “The revolutionary mass, to be turned on by media buttons” (340).
Turning to the animal rights movement, I would first like to state that there are indeed many contributors to this movement with the purest of intentions to help animals on a large scale. However, as some sources suggest, there are many leaders at the peak of the movement that stray from the movement’s original cause. Considering many of the celebrity faces that are used by PETA in attempt to reduce the amount of animals killed for fur clothing, I would argue that many of the celebrities do in fact own fur products or at the very least wear leather. PETA has transformed into yet another avenue for celebrities to have their faces advertised to the world, or American popular culture. I feel this is unfortunate because, as I stated, there are many people who work diligently to assist animals in need of help. PETA should not be just another faculty for celebrities in need of a career booster.
More to follow…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-564215/You-hippy-crites-When-comes-saving-planet-celebrities-practise-preach.html
Looking at social movements, specifically the ones we have covered throughout this course, I immediately thought of two movements that are heavily influenced by the media: the Environmental Movement and the Animal Rights Movement, more specifically, PETA. Rarely does a day go by where I am not bombarded by some form of eco-friendly media representation. From fashion to automobiles to trendy alternative grocery stores, the media has amplified becoming a “green” do-gooder. Even celebrities have jumped on the bandwagon. This is not to say that becoming environmentally conscious is a bad thing, it most certainly is not. The problem here is what Gitlin alluded to in his article; the publicizing of social movements via media outlets has created dissonance between the base of the movement (the political agenda, goals, aspirations) and the image displayed by the media, thus, new recruits and future of the movement as a whole. The environmental movement has many “performing leaders,” or celebrities, as Gitlin states. This is not limited to celebrity faces such as John Travolta, Chris Martin, or Brad and Angelina. Presidential candidates often take a great interest in global warming and other environmental concerns only to be later drawn out and little is done. Or in the event that a movement figurehead seeks the movement’s media presence as an opportunity to push his or her own agenda. The media facilitates this type of illusion to the masses, as Gitlin (2009) states, “The revolutionary mass, to be turned on by media buttons” (340).
Turning to the animal rights movement, I would first like to state that there are indeed many contributors to this movement with the purest of intentions to help animals on a large scale. However, as some sources suggest, there are many leaders at the peak of the movement that stray from the movement’s original cause. Considering many of the celebrity faces that are used by PETA in attempt to reduce the amount of animals killed for fur clothing, I would argue that many of the celebrities do in fact own fur products or at the very least wear leather. PETA has transformed into yet another avenue for celebrities to have their faces advertised to the world, or American popular culture. I feel this is unfortunate because, as I stated, there are many people who work diligently to assist animals in need of help. PETA should not be just another faculty for celebrities in need of a career booster.
More to follow…
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-564215/You-hippy-crites-When-comes-saving-planet-celebrities-practise-preach.html
Wednesday, January 6, 2010
Opinion Assignment #2
Choosing a single ideal figurehead for the women’s rights movement would be an incredibly difficult task. Considering all of the monumental women who have significantly contributed to the women’s movement since the movement’s beginning, selecting only one would be nearly impossible. Hypothetically, a leader or figurehead of the women’s movement would essentially have to embody an identity shared by many, if not the majority, of members. Perhaps, rather than focusing on a central identity such as gender or race, centering the movement on a common goal would be more fitting. Addressing the women’s movement as a coalition rather than a collective identity would be the first step towards identifying a figurehead. Kimberle Crenshaw’s article attempts to bring an understanding to the reader of how race and gender intersect in the lives of minority women who experience violence such as battery and rape. She first addresses structural intersectionality by stating it is, “The ways in which the location of women of color at the intersection of race and gender makes our actual experiences of domestic violence, rape, and remedial reform qualitatively different than that of white women” (Crenshaw 1991: 1). My interpretation of this statement stems from the civil rights and original women’s movements. While in the civil rights movement the central identity of the members was based on race. African American women and men had to unite in order to combat segregation and other racist laws restricting freedoms of African Americans. Similar with the original women’s movement, women were standing up against men and the laws that limited their freedom. Black, and other colored women, were marginalized. Their needs were different from their fellow black male supporters in the civil rights movement and different from white women members of the women’s movement. As Crenshaw illustrates in her research, identity politics, “Frequently conflates or ignores intragroup differences” (Crenshaw 1991: 2). After reading Crenshaw’s article, I feel that if a single woman was to represent the women’s movement, that women must be a minority. By electing a minority woman as the figurehead of the women’s movement would potentially attract many minority women to the cause as they may feel their needs and identities are welcomed. Crenshaw also notes that race and gender are not the only intersecting identities that influence women’s lives. Sexuality and social class are also important factors when considering a leader for this movement. Sojourner Truth, born into slavery, was an African American woman known for her work as a feminist and abolitionist. Faced with the intersection of race, gender and class, Truth delivered her famous speech, “Ain’t I a Woman?” at a women’s rights convention in Akron, Ohio. Truth, a woman indeed, asked the audience why they were not fighting for her rights too! After all she stated, “Ain’t I a woman?” the women’s movement in the early beginnings had an identity and frame that did not encompass women who fell outside of the categories of white and middle class. Often these women involved in the beginnings had time to meet while many women, specifically minority and lower-class women, were unable to attend. Furthermore, if African American women began participating in the women’s movement their male counterparts may have interpreted their actions has disloyal. Considering socioeconomic class, selecting a woman from the middle class would be most appropriate for an ideal representation. If the figurehead were to be from the upper class, many middle and working class women might feel as though she would never understand the hardships of life that they experience. By choosing a middle class representative the median between poor and wealthy would be represented. Another alternative would be to appoint a figurehead who was born into a poor or working class family and worked towards a higher class. Sexuality as an identity would be, in my opinion, the most difficult choice for the right figurehead. Radical feminists see heterosexual relationships as oppressive. Having a heterosexual leader or figurehead may infuriate this section of the women’s movement. Finally, looking at religious affiliation, selecting a woman who does not claim a specific religious identity would be most appropriate for the women’s movement. As we read in Young’s article, religion played a major role in defeating the ERA proposal. Mormon women were called by the LDS church leaders to denounce the equal rights amendment. Young argued in his article that Mormon women used the political engagement to serve the church and ultimately secure their eternal fate. I do not necessarily disagree with the gender roles established in the Mormon faith, however, in my opinion religion and political agendas should remain separate from one another. The figurehead of the women’s movement would ideally keep her religious involvement to a minimum when addressing social and political issues and representing the women’s movement.
In looking at the intersections of race, gender, class and sexuality, finding a suitable figurehead for the women’s movement would be incredibly difficult. Because of identity politics, minority, poor and lesbian women feel marginalized. For the purposes of making a final selection, here are the characteristics I feel would ideally represent a figurehead of the women’s movement: minority, lesbian, non-radical, middle-class, and in the age range of 25-35. The benefit of selecting these characteristics and identities is many women would feel some part of their identity is represented within the women’s movement. In order to prevent intragroup conflict within the movement, having a woman that embodies many different identities would be ideal.
In Hendrickson’s article, “The Ladies Before Rosa: Let Us Now Praise Unfamous Women,” he addresses how many women participated in exactly the same behavior as Rosa Parks by refusing to move from their seats on a public bus, yet these women are not recognized in the same respect as Parks. Hendrickson notes that Claudette Colvin was an adolescent when she refused to abandon her seat for a white citizen. Further, she was from a poor family. Parks on the other hand was a well-respected member of the community, beautiful, and youth leader. While many women uttered “No” previous to Parks, she was the woman who sparked an entire movement. I think that had Colvin headed the boycott many participants would not have supported her in the way Parks was supported. Based on Colvin’s age and community involvement she did not carry the necessary weight needed to start a movement. Community members could identify with Parks and furthermore she was respected. While there were many women before Rosa Parks' time that refused to give up their bus seats, only Parks could ignite the fight of the civil rights movement.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Planned Parenthood (pro-choice)
Planned Parenthood is the nation's leading reproductive and health care provider. The key issues Planned Parenthood works to address include:
1) Affordable birth control and other preventative care
2) Protecting abortion access
3) Ensuring Health care access
4) Expanding global reproductive rights
5) Fighting for real sex education
Planned Parenthood is also the nation's leading provider in abortions. As an organization Planned Parenthood seeks greater access to reproductive health care for women and is a large part of the pro-choice movement. Planned Parenthood is an advocate for policies that grant women the right and choice to make decisions regarding reproductive health.
For more information on see: http://www.plannedparenthood.org
Text-based Assignment #2
COLLECTIVE IDENTITY & FRAME:
Pro-Choice
The Pro-choice movement most definitely has a frame. According to Goodwin and Jasper, “Frames are simplifying devices that help us understand an organize the complexities of the world” (Goodwin & Jasper 2009: 55). For the pro-choice movement, focusing on the female body and the right to choose abortion is an essential frame to the movement. Looking at NARAL’s website, their mission is to protect the privacy and choices of women (Prochoiceamerica.org). Organizations such as NARAL are committed to the privacy and protection of women to secure legal abortive measures in the event of an unplanned or unhealthy pregnancy. Furthermore, organizations committed to the Pro-Choice movement work with legislators to prevent further regulations from additional intrusive means of restricting abortions for women. For example, the senate recently denied an amendment that would include restrictive language preventing federal subsidies to cover the cost of abortions. The current level of restriction prevents any federal funding for abortion outside of rape, incest, or threat to the life of the mother (cnn.com).
If the pro-choice movement had one iconic face it would be Margaret Sanger. Margaret Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the world (http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm) Sanger, one of eleven children, watched as young child her mother’s health suffer due to bearing so many children. In response, in 1912 Sanger abandoned her career as a nurse to pursue her passion of helping women protect themselves from unintended pregnancies. In 1916, Sanger and her sister along with a friend opened the first birth control clinic in the United States. This was no easy fleet for these women, especially during this era. The Comstock Act of 1873 prevented these women from legally distributing contraceptives. A federal law prohibiting the sale and distribution of any materials that could be used as contraception or abortifacients were forbidden under the Comstock Act of 1873 (http://law.jrank.org/pages/5508/Comstock-Law-1873.html). Sanger was arrested and charged on many different occasions due to her work, but ultimately was responsible for a change in laws prohibiting the distribution of contraceptives (http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm)
Recruiting new members to the pro-choice movement is not limited to a physical identity. Men and women of all walks of life join the forces of the pro-life movement to combat regulation of reproductive rights. Women seek abortions for many different reasons and the goal of many pro-choice organizations and members is to create safe, medically supervised, legal abortion clinics in order to reduce the amount of unsafe abortions performed each year. Pro-choice websites offer many statements made by families and women who have experienced illnesses and even death following an unsafe, illegal abortion. Pro-choice organizations seek less regulation in order to create a safe environment for women to seek an abortion. So, who joins a pro-choice movement? Individuals and organizations may be interested in joining the pro-choice movement on the basis that they see abortions as a right and choice. Furthermore, many people who would potentially be interested in joining the pro-choice movement are those with prior experience with a social movement, such as the women’s movement or the gay liberation movement. Many men may feel the pro-choice movement’s frame does not include benefits for them. Considering that the pro-choice movement works to protect reproductive rights, and most famously the right to abortion, men may feel outside of the frame. The pro-choice movement does not discriminate on the basis of gender and look to men to support the right to privacy and choice of the female body. Let’s not forget that men are an essential proponent in reproduction and absolutely vital for the pro-choice movement’s future successes.
Pro-Life
The pro-life movement in the United States has been just as present in abortion debates as the pro-choice movement. The framing for the pro-life movement is the reinstitution of protection of innocent human life, an unborn child. Nationally, pro-life supporters came together after Roe v. Wade in protest to legislation that ultimately legalized abortion. The pro-life movement does not center on a shared identity of race, gender or class, but rather a common goal of ending abortions globally and preserving the life of an unborn child. Organizations such as Pro-life Action League and National Right to Live work with members to criminalize abortions as well as “the morning after pill” which can potentially cause an abortion. Members of the pro-life movement believe life begins at the moment of conception rather than implantation and their work exceeds the realm of abortion into emergency contraceptive measures. In order to attract new members as well as retaining current members, the pro-life movement uses an emotional approach. Just looking at a few pro-life websites and one can easily see the emotions being used to attract potential members. Be advised, this website http://www.prolife.com/ offers the viewer a close look at graphic pictures and videos of aborted fetuses. Additionally, they offer personal stories and videos of those who have regretted having an abortion. All of these measures are used to attract potential measures and hopefully change the viewpoints and beliefs of pro-choice individuals.
Pro Both??
Pro-both is a new branch of the pro-choice movement. Members affiliated with pro-both want both pro-choice and pro-life by making abortion a rarity, yet not regulating what a woman chooses to do with her own body. According to proboth.org, a pro-both approach looks for strategies to lower abortion rates increase the ability of adults to control the course of their own lives (www.proboth.org). This movement sees choice and life not as opposites, but rather as ways to work together to decrease the amount of abortions occurring annually which is estimated at approximately 1.3 million.
Intersectionality-
Gender, race, and class impact us all differently. The hegemonic categories of each of these would place an individual in a privileged position depending on how many dominant identities one has. For example, the experience of a white, middle-class, woman would be far different from that one a black, working-class woman. The pro-choice and pro-life movements do not regulate their membership based on the categories of race, gender, and class; however, these categories continue to play a vital role in the lives of participants.
Environmental Movement & Pro-Life Movement:
The Environmental movement is framed around preservation and sustainable management of resources. Similar to both the pro-choice and pro-life social movements, the environmental movement is not based on a shared identity of race, gender or socioeconomic class, but rather a shared interest to preserve life. For the environmental movement rather than a human life, members and supporters pursue the sustainability of planet Earth’s life in order to insure a future. Environmentalists are supported by many different organizations ranging from large corporations, such as major automobile manufacturers to grassroots organizations.
Pro-Choice
The Pro-choice movement most definitely has a frame. According to Goodwin and Jasper, “Frames are simplifying devices that help us understand an organize the complexities of the world” (Goodwin & Jasper 2009: 55). For the pro-choice movement, focusing on the female body and the right to choose abortion is an essential frame to the movement. Looking at NARAL’s website, their mission is to protect the privacy and choices of women (Prochoiceamerica.org). Organizations such as NARAL are committed to the privacy and protection of women to secure legal abortive measures in the event of an unplanned or unhealthy pregnancy. Furthermore, organizations committed to the Pro-Choice movement work with legislators to prevent further regulations from additional intrusive means of restricting abortions for women. For example, the senate recently denied an amendment that would include restrictive language preventing federal subsidies to cover the cost of abortions. The current level of restriction prevents any federal funding for abortion outside of rape, incest, or threat to the life of the mother (cnn.com).
If the pro-choice movement had one iconic face it would be Margaret Sanger. Margaret Sanger was the founder of Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion provider in the world (http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm) Sanger, one of eleven children, watched as young child her mother’s health suffer due to bearing so many children. In response, in 1912 Sanger abandoned her career as a nurse to pursue her passion of helping women protect themselves from unintended pregnancies. In 1916, Sanger and her sister along with a friend opened the first birth control clinic in the United States. This was no easy fleet for these women, especially during this era. The Comstock Act of 1873 prevented these women from legally distributing contraceptives. A federal law prohibiting the sale and distribution of any materials that could be used as contraception or abortifacients were forbidden under the Comstock Act of 1873 (http://law.jrank.org/pages/5508/Comstock-Law-1873.html). Sanger was arrested and charged on many different occasions due to her work, but ultimately was responsible for a change in laws prohibiting the distribution of contraceptives (http://www.dianedew.com/sanger.htm)Recruiting new members to the pro-choice movement is not limited to a physical identity. Men and women of all walks of life join the forces of the pro-life movement to combat regulation of reproductive rights. Women seek abortions for many different reasons and the goal of many pro-choice organizations and members is to create safe, medically supervised, legal abortion clinics in order to reduce the amount of unsafe abortions performed each year. Pro-choice websites offer many statements made by families and women who have experienced illnesses and even death following an unsafe, illegal abortion. Pro-choice organizations seek less regulation in order to create a safe environment for women to seek an abortion. So, who joins a pro-choice movement? Individuals and organizations may be interested in joining the pro-choice movement on the basis that they see abortions as a right and choice. Furthermore, many people who would potentially be interested in joining the pro-choice movement are those with prior experience with a social movement, such as the women’s movement or the gay liberation movement. Many men may feel the pro-choice movement’s frame does not include benefits for them. Considering that the pro-choice movement works to protect reproductive rights, and most famously the right to abortion, men may feel outside of the frame. The pro-choice movement does not discriminate on the basis of gender and look to men to support the right to privacy and choice of the female body. Let’s not forget that men are an essential proponent in reproduction and absolutely vital for the pro-choice movement’s future successes.
Pro-Life
The pro-life movement in the United States has been just as present in abortion debates as the pro-choice movement. The framing for the pro-life movement is the reinstitution of protection of innocent human life, an unborn child. Nationally, pro-life supporters came together after Roe v. Wade in protest to legislation that ultimately legalized abortion. The pro-life movement does not center on a shared identity of race, gender or class, but rather a common goal of ending abortions globally and preserving the life of an unborn child. Organizations such as Pro-life Action League and National Right to Live work with members to criminalize abortions as well as “the morning after pill” which can potentially cause an abortion. Members of the pro-life movement believe life begins at the moment of conception rather than implantation and their work exceeds the realm of abortion into emergency contraceptive measures. In order to attract new members as well as retaining current members, the pro-life movement uses an emotional approach. Just looking at a few pro-life websites and one can easily see the emotions being used to attract potential members. Be advised, this website http://www.prolife.com/ offers the viewer a close look at graphic pictures and videos of aborted fetuses. Additionally, they offer personal stories and videos of those who have regretted having an abortion. All of these measures are used to attract potential measures and hopefully change the viewpoints and beliefs of pro-choice individuals.
Pro Both??
Pro-both is a new branch of the pro-choice movement. Members affiliated with pro-both want both pro-choice and pro-life by making abortion a rarity, yet not regulating what a woman chooses to do with her own body. According to proboth.org, a pro-both approach looks for strategies to lower abortion rates increase the ability of adults to control the course of their own lives (www.proboth.org). This movement sees choice and life not as opposites, but rather as ways to work together to decrease the amount of abortions occurring annually which is estimated at approximately 1.3 million.
Intersectionality-
Gender, race, and class impact us all differently. The hegemonic categories of each of these would place an individual in a privileged position depending on how many dominant identities one has. For example, the experience of a white, middle-class, woman would be far different from that one a black, working-class woman. The pro-choice and pro-life movements do not regulate their membership based on the categories of race, gender, and class; however, these categories continue to play a vital role in the lives of participants.
Environmental Movement & Pro-Life Movement:
The Environmental movement is framed around preservation and sustainable management of resources. Similar to both the pro-choice and pro-life social movements, the environmental movement is not based on a shared identity of race, gender or socioeconomic class, but rather a shared interest to preserve life. For the environmental movement rather than a human life, members and supporters pursue the sustainability of planet Earth’s life in order to insure a future. Environmentalists are supported by many different organizations ranging from large corporations, such as major automobile manufacturers to grassroots organizations.
Friday, January 1, 2010
Opinion Assignment #1
Focusing on social movements discussed in this week's readings: civil rights, women’s movement, gay liberation, chicano/chicana, and Vietnam War, struggles between radicalism and assimilation were apparent. Looking first at the civil rights movement, the difference in approach between Martin Luther King Jr. and other non-violent leaders, in comparison to more radical tactics as those displayed by Malcolm X, are extreme. As documented in King’s “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” King and his followers displayed “nonviolent direct action.” As stated by King, “Nonviolent direct action seeks to create such a crisis and foster such a tension that a community which has constantly refused to negotiate is forced to confront the issue” (King 1963: 3). King and other non-violent supporters demonstrated their willingness to seek justice by sit-ins at lunch counters, boycotting shopping centers, and refusing to resort to any violent measures in the event that police or civilian brutality occurred. King addresses in his letter differences between just and unjust laws and the required willingness of civil rights activists to break unjust laws and ultimately go to jail if necessary in their fight towards justice. King maintained that through direct violent action change could occur while Malcolm X took the approach of “any means necessary,” to create a change in black oppression (Carson 2005: 12). Malcolm, a civil rights activist and member of Nation of Islam, sought alternative measures to King’s nonviolent approach. Malcolm preached black superiority and the demise of the white race. While his means were extreme and far different from King’s, Malcolm X had a large support group and following and will forever be remembered as one of the most influential African Americans in history.
The women’s movement offers another example of differences between groups within the same movement and pursuing similar interests. In Freeman’s article, “The Women’s Movement,” reform and radical are two branches of the movement that maintain different strategies, ideologies, and structural organization. The names of each group do not provide much information, as feminists do not represent sides of the traditional left and right ends of a political spectrum. Although feminists make-up two different branches of the women’s movement, the two groups share more similarities than differences. Freeman names the reform branch “The older branch,” and consists of organizations and an older median age of members. Furthermore, “Their activities tend to be centered on legal and economic problems” (Freeman 2009: 24). The younger branch of the women’s movement, radicals, is structurally different from their older, or reform, counterparts. Radicals generally have many small groups within their branch and have no hierarchical structure. Most members of this branch are under the age of 30 (Freeman 2009). The two groups appear to be different from one another, but it is important to remember that these women (and men) are essentially pursuing the same goals.
Fracturing within a movement is common because often women feel their needs are not met within the original movement. The original women’s movement consisted primarily of middle to upper class white women. In “The Origins and History of the Chicano Movement,” author Roberto Rodriguez notes, “Prior to Chicana feminists stepping forward, dealing with feminist issues was seen as white women stuff” (7). As any social organization grows, members potentially feel their needs are not being addressed and branch into their own organization creating a fracturing within the movement even though many of their goals and issues are quite similar.
The Black Panther Party (BPP) defined the concepts of rights differently from many other organizations and groups associated with the civil rights movement. In, “October 1966 Black Panther Party Platform and Program,” the article outlines what the Black Panthers want and believe. A socialist movement indeed, the Black Panther Party sees employment, housing, education, and the justice system as essential rights. With the exception of the criminal justice system, employment, housing and education are considered privileges in the United States rather than rights. Furthermore, the BPP feels that black citizens should not be forced to participate in military affairs. This appears problematic in the sense that they urge the government to provide housing, education and employment, yet feel they should not be required to serve in the United States Amred forces. The BPP was extreme in their requests, yet supported their claims with a valid argument. While King and the Black Panther Party share similarities, the BPP differs from King’s concept of rights, where King focuses on constitutional rights and integration.
Carson argues in his article, “The Unfinished Dialogue of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X,” that had the two great figures of the civil rights movement lived, their followers would come to realize that the differences between the two men were not as significant as the their shared dedication towards the same struggle for racial advancement (Carson 2005). The women’s movement is an example of two different groups of individuals working towards attaining the same goal, women equality. While their approaches and structure of their individual groups were different, their similarities, such as the similarities between Malcolm X and King were, were far more significant.
While both King and Malcolm were different in their approaches toward attaining racial advancement, neither approach was more valid than the other. King maintained a non-violent approach in order to “[C]reate a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation” (King, 1963: 3). King felt this was the best approach in order to open the lines of communication between those unwilling to integrate and those pursuing their constitutional rights. King also acknowledged that if those opposing integration would not be willing to grant blacks the same rights as whites, violence would ultimately occur. As King announces in his letter, “And I am further convinced that if our white brothers dismiss as “rabble rousers” and “outside agitators” those of us who employ nonviolent direct action, and if they refuse to support our nonviolent efforts, millions of Negroes will, out of frustration and despair, seek solace and security in black nationalist ideologies—a development that would inevitably lead to a frightening racial nightmare” (King 1963: 7). What King suggests is rather than resort to violent measures initially, first seek nonviolent means, although King was convinced if racial discrimination did not cease, blacks nationwide would implement violence as a means for racial justice. Carson offers the reader the differences between King’s and Malcolm’s upbringing as a possible source for their different strategies. King, son of preachers, was raised in love and a financially comfortable home, while Malcolm was raised in poverty and taught from a young age that white men were the enemy. Carson suggests that these opposing strategies of King and Malcolm X are reconcilable. Perhaps if the men had set aside their differences in approach, they would have been far more successful than separately. In looking to the future, social movements as a whole need to look to each other to support and cultivate success as one rather than independent units.
References
Carson, C. (2005). The Unfinished dialogue of martin luther king jr. and malcolm x. New York:
Freeman, Jo. (Ed.). (2009). The Women's movement. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.
King Jr., M.L. (1963). Letter from a birmingham jail.
October 1966 Black Panther Party Platform and Program
Rodriguez, R. (1996). The Origins and history of the chicano movement. East Lansing:
The women’s movement offers another example of differences between groups within the same movement and pursuing similar interests. In Freeman’s article, “The Women’s Movement,” reform and radical are two branches of the movement that maintain different strategies, ideologies, and structural organization. The names of each group do not provide much information, as feminists do not represent sides of the traditional left and right ends of a political spectrum. Although feminists make-up two different branches of the women’s movement, the two groups share more similarities than differences. Freeman names the reform branch “The older branch,” and consists of organizations and an older median age of members. Furthermore, “Their activities tend to be centered on legal and economic problems” (Freeman 2009: 24). The younger branch of the women’s movement, radicals, is structurally different from their older, or reform, counterparts. Radicals generally have many small groups within their branch and have no hierarchical structure. Most members of this branch are under the age of 30 (Freeman 2009). The two groups appear to be different from one another, but it is important to remember that these women (and men) are essentially pursuing the same goals.
Fracturing within a movement is common because often women feel their needs are not met within the original movement. The original women’s movement consisted primarily of middle to upper class white women. In “The Origins and History of the Chicano Movement,” author Roberto Rodriguez notes, “Prior to Chicana feminists stepping forward, dealing with feminist issues was seen as white women stuff” (7). As any social organization grows, members potentially feel their needs are not being addressed and branch into their own organization creating a fracturing within the movement even though many of their goals and issues are quite similar.
The Black Panther Party (BPP) defined the concepts of rights differently from many other organizations and groups associated with the civil rights movement. In, “October 1966 Black Panther Party Platform and Program,” the article outlines what the Black Panthers want and believe. A socialist movement indeed, the Black Panther Party sees employment, housing, education, and the justice system as essential rights. With the exception of the criminal justice system, employment, housing and education are considered privileges in the United States rather than rights. Furthermore, the BPP feels that black citizens should not be forced to participate in military affairs. This appears problematic in the sense that they urge the government to provide housing, education and employment, yet feel they should not be required to serve in the United States Amred forces. The BPP was extreme in their requests, yet supported their claims with a valid argument. While King and the Black Panther Party share similarities, the BPP differs from King’s concept of rights, where King focuses on constitutional rights and integration.
Carson argues in his article, “The Unfinished Dialogue of Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X,” that had the two great figures of the civil rights movement lived, their followers would come to realize that the differences between the two men were not as significant as the their shared dedication towards the same struggle for racial advancement (Carson 2005). The women’s movement is an example of two different groups of individuals working towards attaining the same goal, women equality. While their approaches and structure of their individual groups were different, their similarities, such as the similarities between Malcolm X and King were, were far more significant.
While both King and Malcolm were different in their approaches toward attaining racial advancement, neither approach was more valid than the other. King maintained a non-violent approach in order to “[C]reate a situation so crisis packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation” (King, 1963: 3). King felt this was the best approach in order to open the lines of communication between those unwilling to integrate and those pursuing their constitutional rights. King also acknowledged that if those opposing integration would not be willing to grant blacks the same rights as whites, violence would ultimately occur. As King announces in his letter, “And I am further convinced that if our white brothers dismiss as “rabble rousers” and “outside agitators” those of us who employ nonviolent direct action, and if they refuse to support our nonviolent efforts, millions of Negroes will, out of frustration and despair, seek solace and security in black nationalist ideologies—a development that would inevitably lead to a frightening racial nightmare” (King 1963: 7). What King suggests is rather than resort to violent measures initially, first seek nonviolent means, although King was convinced if racial discrimination did not cease, blacks nationwide would implement violence as a means for racial justice. Carson offers the reader the differences between King’s and Malcolm’s upbringing as a possible source for their different strategies. King, son of preachers, was raised in love and a financially comfortable home, while Malcolm was raised in poverty and taught from a young age that white men were the enemy. Carson suggests that these opposing strategies of King and Malcolm X are reconcilable. Perhaps if the men had set aside their differences in approach, they would have been far more successful than separately. In looking to the future, social movements as a whole need to look to each other to support and cultivate success as one rather than independent units.
References
Carson, C. (2005). The Unfinished dialogue of martin luther king jr. and malcolm x. New York:
Freeman, Jo. (Ed.). (2009). The Women's movement. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.
King Jr., M.L. (1963). Letter from a birmingham jail.
October 1966 Black Panther Party Platform and Program
Rodriguez, R. (1996). The Origins and history of the chicano movement. East Lansing:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)