Hissy Cat

« All Hail Evolution | Main | Paperback Of The Week »

November 18, 2005

Repro Depot

Nerve's reproductive rights issue is out. Jill at Feministe gives a comprehensive round-up of the juicier pieces and provides a meaty, insightful critique. She does an especially good job dealing with this article about a "pro-choice" woman who thinks second-term abortion is a "sin" and feels "revulsion" for women have second-term abotions. Jill articulated my reaction to the piece more eloquently than I could have done. Whereas I probably would have written "the author is a self-righteous ninny who uses one hand to pat herself on the back for having gone to pro-choice rallies while using the other hand to shake a finger at women who actually have abortions," Jill puts it thusly:

Personal, private discomfort is one thing. Talking about it is fine. But that isn't what she's talking about here -- what she's actually saying is, "I do not trust you to be your own moral decision-maker. I believe that my moral misgivings are more valuable and valid than the decisions you make about what goes on in your own body. I believe there is a right way and a wrong way to have an abortion, and you're doing it the wrong way."

That's why you should read Jill. Also highly recommended is BitchPhd's (old) post about the misogyny of the pro-choice with stipulations position.

The other article that caught my attention-- and Jill's, too-- was Baumgardarner's article about the stigma of second or third (or forth or fifth or sixth) abortions amongst the pro-choice set.

There were a couple of moments in Baumgardner's article where I had to go 'huh?' What the hell is a "mentsrual extraction," for instance? And then there's this:

Pauline Bart . . . suggested at a screening of "Speak Out" that younger women learn to do abortions themselves just as the collective of women known as "Jane" did pre-Roe v. Wade. "It's just like taking a melon-baller and scooping out a melon," she said, referring to performing an abortion in ones' own apartment. I nodded earnestly but thought, "No, it isn't." Or, at least, it isn't to me. I don't doubt that some women experience abortion as devoid of angst as Pauline Bart depicts, and for them each abortion is created equal.

Does Baumgardner harbor reservations about D.I.Y. uterus mellon-balling because of abortion angst? That seems to be what she is suggesting, but that is so puzzling that I can't even make sense of it. D.I.Y. abortions = not good. I agree with her there. But their not-goodness has nothing to do with the emotional weight of having an abortion. I don't have any moral angst about having my tonsils removed, but I'm not about to grab pliers and some barbeque tongs to pull 'em out because removing tonsils, like removing the products of conception, is a medical procedure with a certain amount of risk involved and it would fucking stupid to try to do on my own. First-term abortions are, as far as invasive medical procedures go, straightforward and not very risky. But it ain't mellon-balling. Without sonograph equipment, products of coneption (especially if it is very early in the pregnancy) can be left behind. Scraping the uterus can leave scarring if done incorrectly and complicate a woman's future fertility. Hemorraghing can happen. That's why it is imperative that abortion be legal and available in safe situations, hospitals or clinics, by medical professionals who know what they are doing and are prepared to handle all possibilities. I understand that in certain situations people have to do the best they can-- whether that means inducing abortion at home because abortion is illegal or treating cancer with folk remedies and prayer because medical treatment is unavailable or unaffordable or whatever. But that's not what we should be aiming for.

Anyway, something in Baumgardner's article did strike a nerve. I mentioned once on this blog, just in passing, while yammering on about my health-insurance woes, that I had an abortion. Yes, I had an abortion. About two months ago, I was out for drinks with then-boyfriend Brett and a bunch of our friends. The topic of med school came up-- one of the friends is thinking of applying-- and I guess we were talking about rotations, and Brett mentioned that his sister, a med student, said that the rotation she liked the least was her gynecology rotation, when she worked in an abortion clinic, and that she found that experience upsetting. Something about him saying this kind of burned my fur. What was his point? That abortions are sad and upsetting? I bit my tongue at the time-- after all, if that's what she said, that's what she said, there's nothing to argue with there-- but later asked Brett what he meant by that and why his sister found it so upsetting. Part of it had to do with her personal 'ick' factor, fine. But part of it was that she found it upsetting that a lot of the women who were there had already had multiple abortions. "Why is that upsetting?" I asked. I don't remember what his answer was. I do remember that it ticked me off. Part of it had to do with women who didn't use birth control and who were irresponsible-- more or less the same old 'abortion as birth control' panic as usual.

I pointed out that, as I had already had an abortion, if I ever got pregnant again, I would be one of those women who'd had more than one abortion. "No, not like you," he said, "you're resposible. You're on the pill. I don't mean women like you at all." Of course, I was responsible and on the pill when I got pregnant (by him) and had abortion numero uno. I don't remember how the argument ended, but I went to sleep feeling insulted as well as pissed. Pissed because who was he to judge the women whose circumstances he did not know, insulted because I felt at that moment that I was one of them-- one of those women.

I think Brett had a harder time with the abortion, in some ways, than I did. While he did not have to deal with the physical discomforts of pregnancy and abortion, he had a kind of guilt about it that I never did. Both my parents are doctors and my aunt is a doctor who performs abortions. The attitude on sexual matters in my home was a practical, straightforward realism. People who have sex sometimes get pregnant. Even people who use contraception get pregnant. The pill has a small failure rate even with perfect use. I just happened to get (un)lucky.

Brett, though, felt bad, like we'd done something wrong. Since I was on the pill, we didn't use condoms, and he felt responsible for getting me knocked up. A few weeks after the abortion, when we started having sex again, we used condoms because I'd changed pills and was adviced by the doctor to use a secondary method for a few weeks while my hormones settled down. When those weeks were up, I wanted to stop using condoms, but Brett was wary. What, he asked, if in another eight or nine or ten months you get pregnant again, is that just how it is going to be, every so often you get pregnant and have an abortion?

Well, the short answer is yes. I'm not with Brett anymore, but I'm twenty-two years old, I plan on having sex and hope I have lots of it. I'm also, as it turns out, ridiculoulsly fertile. The odds are that before my eggs are up, I will get pregnant again. I don't plan on it, don't look forward to it, and certainly don't want it to happen. Realistically, though, it will, and if and when I do, I will have another abortion. Which is why I still feel like I'm one of those women.

Posted by hissycat at November 18, 2005 07:36 PM

Comments

Posted by: Merideth Carleton at May 31, 2006 09:46 AM

Posted by: rate my pussy at December 3, 2006 04:37 PM

Posted by: rate my pussy at December 3, 2006 04:38 PM

Posted by: amigo at December 27, 2006 01:30 PM

Posted by: amigo at December 31, 2006 03:58 AM

Posted by: tom at January 25, 2007 01:38 PM

Post a comment