It’s been a rough day. I won’t go into details, because let’s face it, this ain’t my Facebook (and I’m one of those weirdos who only friends people she’s actually met), but it was a crappy day.
Okay, one detail. Some jackhole at the bus stop today declared that my N7 t-shirt was obviously my boyfriends’. My ladies’ cut N7 t-shirt (no link, as it was on sale when I got it, and now it’s gone). Thankfully he got on a different bus, and I remembered that I’m too sick to go to jail to smacking him on both sides of his shorts with my cane. Really, we’re still on the “fake geek girl” kick? Oh well.
So I’m kinda cranky, so I decided to dig up an article I shared on Facebook that I’d promised to address here. It’s from the particularly fuckbrained branch of the pro-life movement, Secular Pro-life, “Refuting the Ridiculous Pro-Abortion Claim: The Pro-Life Movement is Anti-Sex”.
So, let’s not even talk about the place where this article is posted, LifeNews, with its usual brand of twisted nonsense. Oh wait, maybe we should, because this article is PERFECTLY rife with building up strawmen and then knocking them down.
First that title: Ohhh, “pro-abortion”, soooo scary! I’m sure that’ll go over really well with the intended audience. Well, I am pro-abortion, so that doesn’t really scare me. I’m pro safe, legal abortion in the same way I am pro safe, legal dental extractions, cancer surgeries, and transplants.
Let’s begin with the post (all bolds are mine, btw):
The pro-abortion claim that pro-lifers are anti-sex is nothing new. From Canadian abortion advocates’ recent attempt to make some kind of point by dressing up as penises and vaginas, to Amanda Marcotte’s bizarre assertion that pro-lifers’ motive in protesting outside abortion facilities is “to gawk and yell at women whose soon-to-be-terminated pregnancies constitute solid proof they’ve recently touched a penis” (I guess we’ll be protesting outside maternity wards next), nothing really surprises me anymore.
Wow, it take a special kind of assumption to drop that kind of load. It’s not that we think pro-lifers are “anti-sex”, it’s more like they’re “anti-sex that is happening without their permission and beyond their stated purpose”. Premarital sex, gay sex, non-procreative sex, you name it, they hate it and fight against it. Now, most pro-lifers mask this as God’s plan, but this is “Secular” Pro-Life, so…yeah. Next time, try reading those links for comprehension.
Allow me to propose a simple logical argument.
Major premise: Pro-lifers constitute a little less than half the adult population of the United States.
Minor premise: The vast majority of American adults have sex from time to time.
Conclusion: Most American pro-lifers have sex. And I’ll bet they enjoy it, too
Well, you’ve got “simple” down pretty good. Logical? Not on your life.
You’re starting from the assumption that we think pro-lifers don’t have sex. Given the number of sidewalk bullies who are beyond eager to gab about children and grandchildren and even sometimes bring the little darlings along to frolic around the dismembered fetus signs, I have no fucking clue where this even comes from. Hell, I’ve had a bully practically dangle a baby in front of the escorts as if we were supposed to either instantly change our minds by the power of cute (granted, she was adorable!) or hiss and hide like vampires exposed to a cross. Yeah, we know they have the sex, so this “logic” does nothing but punt a strawman who you haven’t even bothered to prove in the first place. You went from “concerned about people having the wrong kind of sex” straight to “all sex is icky” and only the most uncharitable of readings could get you there.
Then again, given the surprise some pro-lifers have when some pro-choice folk manage to both support the right of an abortion AND have kids of their own (to the point of downright asking pregnant escorts why they don’t abort their wanted pregnancies), strawmen are part and parcel.
Do pro-lifers want people to have sex irresponsibly? Of course not. People shouldn’t have sex until they are ready, and people certainly shouldn’t have unprotected sex if they aren’t prepared to handle the baby who may be conceived as a result. But that doesn’t make the pro-life movement anti-sex.
This may surprise you, but I agree. As a matter of fact, our side totally agrees with you. And it’s YOUR side who’s against arming people, especially young people, with the comprehensive knowledge that would help them make responsible choices when it comes to sex.
(and also..nice touch with the wedding couple pic there. It gives us a hint at what might be defined as “responsible”, and that is where we start to disagree)
It makes us anti-irresponsible-sex. Most pro-choicers are opposed to irresponsible sex too; given the alarming spread of STDs, you’d have to be stupid to advocate a lifestyle of unprotected, promiscuous sex.
…which is why very few people are for unprotected, promiscuous sex. Very good. You get points.
Many pro-lifers believe that the only responsible course of action is to abstain from sex altogether until marriage, and I respect that. But others do have sex before marriage (or engage in premarital sexual activity other than vaginal intercourse), and there’s no sense in pretending that the pro-life movement is made up of virgins.
See, we were going good for a minute there. Good for you for bucking the trend of your more theistic kin and acknowledging that sex outside of marriage and sex that isn’t penis in vagina is a thing that people do. I would recommend promoting that even more…and seeing just how welcoming your ‘godless’ ways are then. But yes, we were rocking until that last part. Holy record scratch, Batman.
No one’s pretending that part. At all. Again, it takes a very uncharitable reading to glean “pro-lifers are virgins scared of naughty parts, nya!” from any of what you linked to earlier. The breeze from the point whizzing over your head must be oh so refreshing.
There is a large space between the two extremes, between the slut-shaming, chastity-belt-wearing caricature and the needless-risk-taking sex maniac. The pro-life movement is made up almost entirely of people in the middle. (And so is the pro-choice movement, for that matter.) We aren’t going to faint at the sight of a nutjob in a penis costume, or scream in horror at women who’ve had sex. But we are going to stand up and oppose any attitude toward sex that treats abortion as just a form of birth control, and that is willing to sacrifice the lives of unborn children in the pursuit of sexual pleasure.
And here you ends things the exact same way as the previous paragraph, start with a reasonable point, and then end with nonsense. As for the “abortion as birth control” I will direct you to my previous blog post about how nonsensical that claim is. As to your oh-so-dramatic description of abortion as a “sacrifice” to sexual pleasure, well, you’re kinda negating your whole “pro-life isn’t anti-sex” point.
See, pro-life is anti-sex. They are anti-sex they deem “irresponsible”, a definition that is narrow as all fuck, and they make silly claims that abortions are sacrifices, and that having sexual pleasure outside of their narrow definition is apparently a bad thing, which in turn leads to various and sundry shame tactics like the ones I see every damn Saturday morning. While I am glad you are willing to accept the reality of sex being slightly wider than that narrow definition, banning safe and legal abortions aren’t going to a damn thing but sacrifice living born humans in the pursuit of someone else’s sense of righteousness. If you really cared about that “middle”, you should be telling your side to tamp down that shamey shit and stereotyping those who seek abortions as ‘irresponsible”.
And now that I’ve gotten myself all snarked out, behold, folks, my moment of Zen. Ooh-rah!: