Gender Equality and Abortion

Brian Frederking

June 7, 2006

No issue generates more heated rhetoric and unproductive discussion than abortion. The reason is that each side understands the issue in a different way. Those who are pro-choice see abortion as a civil liberties issue. Those who are pro-life see abortion as a civil rights issue.

Civil liberties issues are about the relationship between government and individuals. If we recognize a civil liberty as an inherent individual right, the government cannot infringe upon that right. The pro-choice side sees abortion as an inherent right protected by a constitutional right to privacy. If we believe in civil liberties, we must limit the power of government over individuals. Thus, we should not regulate abortion.

Civil rights issues are about the relationship between government and two groups in society. One group claims that the other group is treating them unequally and asks the government to change the behavior of the other group. The pro-life side sees abortion as the ultimate discriminatory act against those who need protection. If we believe in civil rights, we must increase the power of the government to stop the discriminatory behavior. Thus, we should outlaw abortion.

Ten years of college teaching has shown me that students know no other way of thinking about this issue. Within a civil liberties framework, either a woman has this particular privacy right or she does not. Within a civil rights framework, we either protect the unborn or we do not. We choose one of these two frameworks and start yelling at the other side.

The problem is we have forgotten that abortion rights are intricately connected to the larger women’s movement. The goal of this movement is to break down patriarchal assumptions that men belong in the public sphere and women belong in the private sphere. The women’s movement is about creating both equal gender opportunity in the public sphere (school, jobs, voting, etc.) and equal gender responsibilities in the private sphere (parenting, doing the dishes, etc.).

This of course is very threatening to those who prefer traditional gender roles. For most of human history, the primary role of women was to have and raise children. The women’s movement is asking us to reject traditional gender roles and embrace modern gender roles.

The larger question is do we really want to embrace modern gender roles? Do we really want all men and all women to have the same life opportunities? If so, then we must empower women with unwanted pregnancies to say that right now, at this point in my life, I want to pursue goals in the public sphere rather than perform my traditional role in the private sphere.

If we really want to pursue the social goal of gender equality, then we must be willing to put up with a morally ambiguous medical procedure. Gender equality requires abortion rights. It is a package deal.

All we have to do is look around the world to confirm this. The World Economic Forum recently ranked gender equality in 58 countries around the world. It used five criteria to create the rankings: economic participation, economic opportunity, political empowerment, educational attainment, and health/well-being. Abortion was not explicitly a part of the rankings.

            The top ten countries were Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Denmark, Finland, New Zealand, Canada, United Kingdom, Germany, and Australia. (The United States was 17^th.) All of them have legally protected abortion rights. The bottom ten countries were Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan, Jordan, South Korea, Mexico, Brazil, India, Venezuela, and Chile. All have either outlawed or heavily restricted access to abortion.

            Abortion rights are about the status of women in society. There are two kinds of countries in the world: those who accept modern gender roles and protect abortion rights, and those who prefer traditional gender roles and restrict abortion rights.

            I always stun my students when I say that they do not understand their positions on abortion. The pro-choice students think that it is about the individual bodies of women. But I tell them that they have forgotten the history of the women’s movement. I suggest to them that slogans of “my body, my choice” make them sound like spoiled children.

            The pro-life students are convinced that their position is about saving the lives of the unborn. But I tell them that their position is really a backlash against the women’s movement. It is about keeping women at home and men in power.

            I am not sure that I fully believe this. But my job is to challenge my students. I want them to think about these things. We all should.