Get over my ovaries-Opinion: The on-going war against a woman’s right to choose
By Eugenia Gardner
Women across America are still tackling the uphill battle against a patriarchal system designed to oppress and control them. No desire for dominance appears more prevalent than the government’s long fought battle to control the bodily autonomy of women via their right to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy.
On May 2nd 2022, Politico leaked the first draft of the Supreme Court’s potential ruling on Roe v. Wade. Even though we exist within the liberal bubble of California, many women and people of color are finding insurmountable disparities in reproductive health resources and the ability to access safe ways to have abortions.
Frankly, as a woman of color who grew up during the initial Roe v. Wade decision, I remember the fervor and heated discussions taking place on the news and within the media. So, as we pass the 49 year anniversary of Roe, I and many others are shocked to still find this fight to dismiss the basic human rights of women still taking place.
However, as this fight has managed to continue, so have the amount of people willing to stand up and take the battle to the proverbial front door of misogynists and religious zealots in positions of power. One such person who is doing just that is Haein Shim, a student at Pasadena City College and the president of The Third Wave Intersectional Feminist Club.
“I think this debate continues because we still live in a society where women are continually fighting a battle against a system designed to oppress them,” Shim said.
Shim notes that this system was called out by the late Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
“The decision whether or not to bear a child is central to a woman’s life, wellbeing and dignity and it is a decision she must make for herself, when the government controls that decision for her she’s being treated as less than an adult,” Ginsburg said.
This feeling is echoed by Shim’s breakdown of how these attitudes towards a woman’s choice are actually a tactic utilized by a historically oppressive culture.
“With the ability to navigate the education and working world, conservatives often point to this as being enough to fulfill the benchmarks of gender equality in their eyes,” Shim said. “Similarly, these tactics are often seen when attempting to subvert the effects and presence of systemic racism.”
The fact of the matter is this intentional ignorance works to dismiss the nuances of both racist and misogynistic systems of oppression.
Currently within the state of Missouri, HOUSE BILL NO. 126 — Missouri House of Representatives the “Missouri Stands For The Unborn Act” has passed, which criminalizes women terminating pregnancies, as well as assisting women to be able to get an abortion.
Dr. Sara Muno, a professor of Biological Anthropology at Pasadena City College, said the legislation is “dangerous, ill-conceived, and will be nearly impossible to implement in an equitable and just manner. I am particularly worried that cash incentives will be provided for those who file lawsuits against people accused of intending to or actually ‘aiding and abetting’ anyone wishing to obtain an abortion. The provision does not specify how intent will be determined by the courts, and I am afraid that because of its lack of specification, people will be able to use this provision to penalize people without having to provide much evidence of their ‘wrong-doing’ (a ‘witch-hunt.’ basically).”
Additionally, access to safe abortions will be essentially removed from the state of Missouri, leaving residents within the state forced to take whatever measures they deem necessary to terminate a pregnancy. This often includes unsafe “back door abortions” performed in unsafe spaces without the proper tools, medical knowledge, and after care appropriate for this medical procedure.
“Simply put reproductive rights are human rights and the ability to deny such rights is frankly a violation of women’s human rights,” Shim said.
Conservatives ironically are arguing for the safety of women and the fetus. This stance is a strategic turning of the tables to paint a false picture of an oddly compassionate and caring conservative party that is looking out for the health and safety of women. But the science and data unequivocally proves that pregnancy termination is significantly less dangerous than childbirth.
Take the statistics of this 2012 comparative study from The National Library of Medicine for example. Beginning with an objective to assess the safety of abortion compared to childbirth, “the pregnancy-associated mortality rate among women who delivered live neonates was 8.8 deaths per 100,000 live births. The mortality rate related to induced abortion was 0.6 deaths per 100,000 abortions.” The study concluded that legally induced abortion is markedly safer than childbirth. The risk of death associated with childbirth also is approximately 14 times higher than that with abortion.
Muno said women’s access to healthcare is under attack now because of “the changing political dynamics of the Supreme Court.”
“Thanks to Donald Trump’s appointment of conservative-leaning justices, the supreme court has a conservative Super Majority for the first time since 1930,” she said.
Amidst women’s rights being so bluntly under attack, it is difficult to keep up with all of the details and nuances of this political cultural conflict. There is an active effort by conservative pundits to co-opt the internalized misogyny and “incel” culture for the simple agenda of retaining power.
Shim argues that now more than ever we need to unite to fight this battle and stressed that should Roe v. Wade be overturned, the brunt of the consequences will fall on people of a lower economic class and people of color who already have a limited access to reproductive health services. This in turn will only widen the disparities we see between those demographics and their white and wealthy counterparts within the context of sustainability.
The impact of this possible overturning would create notable hurdles economically as well. Women essentially forced to have children may need to seek government assistance, something which conservatives ironically often take issue with (hence the racist term “welfare queens“ used to describe women — often women of color — who are viewed as taking advantage of social services to turn a profit).
As protests and outrage have begun, Supreme Court Justice Alito is at the center of the controversy which many are labeling as regressive, misogynistic, and draconian. All of these labels aptly fit the description of the draft decision but beyond the labels and rhetoric surrounding this decision, there is a dark and starkly different vision of the future America’s women will have to contend with. This future is the twisted championing that frankly women, their autonomy, their safety and their consideration as human beings does not matter in the forthcoming America.
Diving into the specifics of Alito’s opinion, one line that stands out is the following, “The regulation of a medical procedure that only one sex can undergo does not trigger heightened constitutional scrutiny” unless the regulation is just a pretext for discrimination. Alito argues that no constitutional right has the capacity to be infringed upon simply because the regulation of abortion only directly affects women. Not only is this inaccurate as some non binary people have the capacity to undergo this procedure but it also indirectly paints a picture of discrimination that cannot happen without men’s inclusion which inherently patriarchal.
It can also be argued that the expenses of childbirth compared to abortion will adversely affect families across the country as well. A study from the Michigan Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation claims the average out of pocket health care cost of having a child was $4,569 cumulatively with pregnancy cost, delivery, and postpartum care. However, a quick examination and the average cost of abortion within the first trimester can be up to $750, according to Planned Parenthood. While this is still not cheap by any means, it is markedly less expensive than bringing a child into the world.
This decision serves as a direct blockade for the economic sustainability of women and families within America who simply may not be able to take on the economic burden of having a child, in addition to the cost of raising them.
In regards to what strategies we can implement to help all women, this is what Muno advocated for “encouraging the actions of, many pro-choice states (such as California and Connecticut) that are enacting legislation to protect and expand the right to reproductive healthcare for residents and non-residents alike.”
“I think this strategy is an excellent way to establish important safety nets for women ahead of the Supreme Court ruling on Roe V. Wade that will take place in June,” Muno said.
We must not go backwards 49 years but push forward with education, information and new legislation finally acknowledging a woman’s choice as a human right and that it is her choice to make, not politicians’ with agendas that benefit from this patriarchal rhetoric. In order for the future to truly be equitable and sustainable we must do our best to actively create that change now. With a plethora of resources and access to knowledge in our hands, it is more important to do the research and hold politicians both liberal and conservative accountable for the investment of funds, resources, programs, and legislation into a sustainable and equitable future.
