Spare us the sight of men discussing abortion – especially politicians

[niyad]

Spare us the sight of men discussing abortion – especially politicians
Emer O'Toole

If you will never be in the position of needing one, we don’t really want to hear your thoughts on the matter. That includes you, Tim Kaine and Mike Pence

?w=620&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&fit=max&s=29e5278e72ee7262448b55cbbc947eae
‘These two men were about to climb into the wombs of all American women and plant their flags.’ Photograph: ddp USA/REX/Shutterstock



Do you know what’s a relief about Hillary Clinton running for president? There’ll be no rage-inducing section in the debates when two men discuss what reproductive rights they’ll attempt to grant or deny women should they be elected. Oh wait. I forgot about the vice-presidential debate. Darn.
My first reaction to Mike Pence and Tim Kaine’s head-to-head was to try to remember how or why anyone watched presidential debates when they were just two white guys interrupting each other. And my second, when Pence introduced the topic of abortion, was a feeling of creeping dread. These two men were about to climb into the wombs of all American women and plant their flags – an operation every bit as uncomfortable as it sounds.

. . . . .

I knew what was coming. Because I am from Ireland: a country where male abortion oration has been exalted to an art form. To give examples from just the past week (otherwise the selection would be overwhelming), on Sunday Senator Ronan Mullen wrote a column for the Irish Independent vilifying women who travel to England to terminate pregnancies with fatal abnormalities. For Mullen, these women have denied a sick baby “the dignity of being allowed to reach a natural end. The same day, Archbishop Eamon Martin warned Irish politicians “not to leave their faith outside of the door” when forming abortion policy (which, trust me, they were never planning to do anyway). I am from a country where, earlier this year, the group Family & Life held a pro-life event in which all three speakers were men. Men who, when questioned, saw nothing strange about the gendered composition of their learned gathering. I’m from a country where national radio shows routinely exclude Irish women from debates about their reproductive rights. I knew what was coming.
. . . . .




It has been largely absent only if you ignore Clinton’s consistent attention to Trump’s anti-choice rhetoric; how she proudly touts the endorsement of Planned Parenthood (the first endorsement of a primary candidate in the organization’s 100 year history); that she is running on a ticket supporting repeal of the Hyde Amendment, which blocks federal funding for abortion. The abortion issue has been absent only if you ignore the fact that Clinton is about as provocatively pro-choice as any presidential candidate has dared to be.

But Clinton’s feminist politics are beside the point somehow. What’s really exceptional is when two men bare their souls on what abortion means to them. With those pesky women out of the way, they can intelligently explore this fraught question.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/06/men-discussing-abortion-politicians-kaine-pence

[CincyDem]

1. Not sure I get to have this pov, but here goes...

...I found Kaine's perspective beneficial. What I heard was that any decision about termination or continuation of a pregnancy belongs to a woman and whomever she chooses to consult for additional input. It isn't his role, or the role of government, to force one option or the other on a woman nor it is their role to define who must be part of that decision making process.

I didn't hear two men baring their souls with "those pesky women out of the way". I heard one saying - I respect and trust every woman to make their own health and family choices. I heard the other say, in effect, I respect their choice as long as it's the choice I want them to make. That feels less like a discussion and more like a fundamental difference in philosophy on the topic.

To say "two men" in this instance seems like it's creating a false equivalency.

[guillaumeb]

2. I am a man, and I have a personal opinion on abortion.

I am a Christian, with a religious opinion on abortion.

But I respect the Constitution and I support the absolute separation of Church and State.

And I respect a woman's right to make all decisions about her body.

[Maru Kitteh]

3. I think it's helpful for the US to learn that Pence is a freak who wanted women who miscarry

to be forced to have funerals for their lost fetus.

I thought Kaine's explanation of his deep respect for women to make their own choices was also helpful.

[Hekate]

4. Tim Kaine is on our side and believes women are moral agents in our own right.

Mike Pence is a religious fanatic who thinks The Handmaid's Tale is a how-to book. Well, not really. But he may have the Malleus Maleficarum in his personal library. He looks cold, but behind his eyes are the banked fires of one just waiting for the opportunity to smite the wicked.

There is a difference.

[Whiskeytide]

5. Abortion is a political issue ...

... like it or not. As such, political figures - both men and women - are going to discuss it. I thought Kaine did a fine job on the issue. He's entitled to an opinion, as we all are. The problem comes from trying to force your opinion on others, or worse trying to displace the woman's role in the decision.

[niyad]

6. you are rather missing the point. how many of these discussions, with resultant restrictions,

Last edited Thu Oct 6, 2016, 09:37 PM - Edit history (1)

regulations, shaming, etc. are composed strictly of men?

[qwlauren35]

7. This is a primarily male forum.

I am trying to put into words what this means. Some men will express their pro-choice stances. Some people will point out that it's a legitimate political issue, so the fact that they were both men is not important, it is their views that are important.

What many men don't get is that some women don't want to hear men's opinions on abortion. Pro-choice or pro-life. Some women believe that only women should make policy decisions about abortion. And we would still have pro-life and pro-choice. But without the condescension that the men know what's good for the women.

So when I read what you posted (I didn't read the article), I was amused because I could anticipate the responses.

Because this is a primarily male forum.

[athena]

9. Well, I'm female

but I think that if a man wants to defend a woman's right to choose, he's welcome to do so.

For a man to say a woman has a right to decide what happens to her body is very different from a man saying a woman does not have a right to decide and can be used as an incubator regardless of her wishes. Especially when a man says the latter, it is important for another man to respond with the former. After all, a man who believes women's bodies should be under the control of the government will not listen to anything a woman might say.

Just as it is white people who will end racism (as per Ben Jealous), it is men who will end sexism. If women could end sexism by ourselves, we would have done so long ago. This is why I think it's counterproductive for women to reject men who want to be partners in our endeavor to make the world a more egalitarian place for everybody.

[Whiskeytide]

13. Many of them. But that's actually not the point ...

The article you post is also critical of Kaine voicing an opinion. Even though his opinion is pro choice, just not pro abortion. He is a policy maker. His view matters. And it helps push the policy in the direction of reducing the number of abortions through education and contraception, NOT through restrictions or a denial of the woman's right to choose.

You don't have to agree with Kaine. And if your point (or I suppose the article's point) is that he - along with any other person - shouldn't have input into a particular woman's choice ... Then I agree with you. But with regard to policy, not only is he entitled to have an opinion on the issue of abortion, he actually needs to have one. That way his participation in these discussions will, hopefully, result in less restriction, regulation and shaming, etc...

[gabeana]

8. So with your reasoning

I guess women can't talk about prostate issues
This is the United States women/men have a right to talk about any topic they choose it is up to us if we want to listen or not

[Cakes488]

10. Women shouldn't talk about prostate issues nor erectile dysfunction LOL

Yeah right!

[niyad]

11. so wayyyyy to miss the point. and, please note that I am posting an article from the

guardian.

and please be good enough to tell me when women have EVER passed rules and regulations over what men can do with their prostates.

[Whiskeytide]

14. But you understand there is quite a difference...

... between their opinions, right? One wants to ban abortion, and the other feels it is the woman's right to choose.

I understand what the article's point is. For a long time my stance on abortion was that I don't have an opinion because I'm a man and it's not up to me. None of my business, so to speak. 10 or 12 years ago I came to realize that wasn't enough. Not with the anti-choice political machine greased up and ready to roll.

Someone up thread pointed out that sexism won't end until men wake up to it. I think there is some truth in that. And I don't think it makes a lot of sense to take swipes at the ones who already have.

[mythology]

12. The article starts with a biased perspective and then reads into it what they want

to "prove" it.

It is possible to find something personally distasteful but have no desire to outlaw it. I find the thought of smoking pot disgusting, but if other people want to do so, I don't have any desire to outlaw it. The author reads into Kaine that he would outlaw it because of her assumption about Kaine's "true" thoughts.

Her opinion is just as silly as it would have been to say to women prior to the passage of the 19th amendment should have had no opinion on politics since they couldn't vote. Or that before women were allowed into combat units that women should have no opinion on war since they weren't involved. I doubt the author would be happy if she were told to sit down and shut up, yet she has no problems telling others to do so. But from her sentence snarking on why anybody would watch two white guys in a debate makes it clear she's not interested in an intellectual discussion, she's interested in being a demanding pain in the ass, likely because deep down she knows her argument is intellectually insipid.

[Warren DeMontague]

15. I was glad Kaine kept hammering Pence on "why don't you trust women"

that needed to be said.