Can a person be both pro-life and a feminist?

[ZombieHorde]

I think so. Susan B. Anthony is an example.

[sharesunited]

1. How about, can you be pro-life and not support the criminalization of abortion?

[SmileyRose]

78. Yep.

I'm pro life and still support no laws on abortion whatsoever. It's a medical procedure and is therefore automatically governed under whatever laws govern good medicine. Minors seeking an abortion are covered just the same as under any other medical procedure.

[xchrom]

2. No. If you don't believe a woman OWNS her body

You are not a feminist.

Context is everything - Anthony was still a feminist.

[ZombieHorde]

13. Good distinction. nt

[BOG PERSON]

34. the human body is not property

you cannot sell your body or transfer ownership of it.

[The Straight Story]

60. If they own their body, should they have a choice as to where to go with it

and what to do with it when they get there?

Say you own your body and you go to a bar where others drink and smoke - should that be legal?

[BOG PERSON]

82. if my body is my property

should i be allowed to sell myself into slavery?

[The Straight Story]

85. I dunno - should you? Should you be able to terminate your life if you are sick?

At what point do you let the government decide what you can do with your body?

Do you think they should be able to control your choices at any point when it comes to your own body? And if so - when do you think they should not be able to?

Are you for freedom when it comes to being able to go to church, bars, etc? Do you think you should be able to sit at home and smoke/drink with like minded people? Do you think you should be able to go to a bar and sit with like minded folks by choice or do you want someone in government telling you that you cannot?

[BOG PERSON]

103. it depends - at what point does a person's body become her property

is it when she reaches the age of majority? what if she's mentally ill? is her body property of her parents or guardian in that case? property of the state? what?

[Warren Stupidity]

3. If that person supports the criminalization of abortion

that person is not a feminist. Plus your poll choices suck ass.

[ZombieHorde]

6. You're saying my poll choices are like kinky sex?

Just kidding, I know you don't like my choices. What is bad about them?

[CrispyQ]

17. What's bad about them?

Let's start with the term "pro-life." :eyes:

[ZombieHorde]

18. I let people label themselves. nt

[CrispyQ]

19. I'm surprised you would choose that term on a 'liberal' board.

Oops. There's one of those self-labels. My bad.

[ZombieHorde]

21. I have no idea what your reply is trying to communicate. nt

[CTyankee]

4. Anthony lived in a very different era, when abortions were crude affairs and there was

no real hygienic safety. Women died as a result. Today this is different. You cannot compare the abortion of her time with that of today's. We have safer, better hygienic abortions today. In fact, pregnancy and birth is now 10 times more unsafe for a woman's health than that of a first trimester abortion.

If Anthony were alive today, I will bet she would be pro-choice!

[ZombieHorde]

11. She against abortion for moral reasons.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/opinion/13schiff.html

[CTyankee]

14. It seems she was, indeed, conflicted. But the fact remained that women

risked their lives for both childbirth and abortion. Anthony did neither, it seems. And so it goes.

If abortion was as easily available, and as safe, then as now, I think she might have had a very different idea about it...just sayin'

[Luminous Animal]

40. Did you actually read the oped that you linked to?

"Feminists for Life cites an 1869 article in her newspaper denouncing “child murder,” labeling abortion “a most monstrous crime,” and advocating its end. “No matter what the motive, love of ease, or a desire to save from suffering the unborn innocent, the woman is awfully guilty who commits the deed,” blares the article. “It will burden her conscience in life, it will burden her soul in death.”

What is generally not mentioned is that the essay argues against an anti-abortion law; its author did not believe legislation would resolve the issue of unwanted pregnancy. Also not mentioned is the vaporous textual trail. According to the editors of Anthony’s papers, the article is not hers."

[ZombieHorde]

56. Yes, I read that. The paper is hers. We say Ron Paul is racist because his paper had racist articles

in it. He did not write them, but he published them.

She published the article describing abortion as child murder, and she was involved in the suffrage movement, which was against abortion.

[Luminous Animal]

69. It was not signed by her nor did it include the customary shorthand for her signature.

And the paper in question, was an issues paper. That is, it advanced topic for debate not, rather, to advance an ideology.


If you insist on going off half-cocked, may I suggest you go elsewhere where half-cocked is often mistaken for full-cocked.

[ZombieHorde]

72. Does she have any pro-abortion associations?

Her paper printed anti-abortion articles, and the movement she was involved with was anti-abortion.

If you insist on going off half-cocked, may I suggest you go elsewhere where half-cocked is often mistaken for full-cocked.

Aren't you above insults?

[Luminous Animal]

84. I am not above insults when dealing directly with people who advance flimsy right-wing

fantasies.

According to the anti-abortion fundies, someone anonymously wrote one anti-abortion article in a paper that was dedicated to advancing debate.

[ZombieHorde]

87. If she also published pro-choice articles, then her publishing would be poor evidence

for claiming she was pro-life.

Do you think the suffrage movement was pro-choice or pro-life (anti-choice)?

[Luminous Animal]

97. The article advocated decriminalization of abortion. That is pro-choice.

[ZombieHorde]

101. No, you misread. The article said legislation would not resolve the issue of unwanted pregnancy.

This is not saying abortion should be legal, this is saying unwanted pregnancy can't be solved by the government.

[DURHAM D]

5. Stupid poll.

Guess you are trying to get something going against a feminist who has been dead for over 100 years.

[ZombieHorde]

7. No, but I do enjoy people's interpretations of my polls. nt

[Arugula Latte]

15. Agree -- stupid poll.

With a stupid agenda.

[ZombieHorde]

16. What is my agenda? nt

[Arugula Latte]

28. You're trying to justify an anti-abortion stance just because Susan B. Anthony was against abortion.

Also, you're using rightwing framing ... "pro-life." I call bullshit.

In addition, I see that you lack a uterus. Why don't you come back and post your little poll when you grow a uterus.

[ZombieHorde]

31. How did you come to this conclusion? Is it just the "pro-life" label?

I am interested in how you think.

[ZombieHorde]

42. I once made a poll comparing wolves and mice and people accused me of advocating the killing of

wolves. Some could not see I was advocating against killing mice. It was really interesting for me.

[DURHAM D]

44. Very well stated. Thank you.

[ZombieHorde]

53. How did you come to the conclusion my OP was anti-abortion? nt

[eShirl]

8. don't you mean anti-abortion?

"pro-life" is one of those vague terms suitable for politicians

[ZombieHorde]

12. I let people label themselves, but I completely understand your opposition to calling

Republicans pro-life.

[seabeyond]

23. thank you. my comment to self was, i believe in life (pro life) and believe in choice.

i hate that pro life bullshit especially as the very person that claims, will also support death penalty and war and not feeding the hungry and not provide medical care

[laconicsax]

9. It partially depends on whether one subscribes to 3rd-wave feminism.

In 3rd-wave feminism, anything a woman does is feminist, whether it's fighting for equal pay or doing bukkake videos to pay for pole-dancing lessons.

Being stuck in the 2nd wave myself, I'm inclined to say no. Susan Anthony put sugar on her porridge.

[Blasphemer]

10. Depends on what you mean by pro-life

I consider myself to be pro-choice and pro-life in the sense that I believe that the children who are willingly brought into the world deserve the best life possible. If you mean pro-life as in pro-life vs. pro-choice as framed in the abortion debate, I do not believe a person can be a feminist and be anti-choice. They can be "pro-life" in terms of what their own decision would be but if they would deny a woman the right to that choice, I don't believe I would consider that person a true feminist. Historically speaking, it's important to take into consideration the time and social mores of the society that a person lived in when judging their views.

[DainBramaged]

20. Can a person be pro-zombie and a zombie hunter?

:hi:

[ZombieHorde]

22. If you truly love killing zombies, then you need lots zombies to kill. nt

[DainBramaged]

29. Until you run out of bullets

LOVED LOVED LOVED Walking Dead

[ZombieHorde]

32. I kill zombies with STDs. Slow, but effective. nt

[DainBramaged]

35. OK then....

CREEPY CRAWLIES AAARRRGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

[ismnotwasm]

24. You mean anti-choice I think

There is nothing 'pro-life' about forced pregnancies. Nothing feminist about them either. I do understand emotional ambiguity in the abstract (the poor little fetus could be a BABY someday) But the actual reality of pregnancy, and everything it entails is intertwined with the very personal and very basic human rights of the one risking pregnancy. It is a human rights issue. Feminists are about human rights, starting with working for women not only have access to those rights; but that they are acknowledged fully human in the first place, rather than, say-- a fetus bag.

[ZombieHorde]

27. I use the term pro-life because that is what they call themselves.

I call Republicans "Republicans" instead of "Repukes," even though Republicans are regurgitated vomit, or double vomit.

[Luminous Animal]

50. And the Nazi's called themselves "socialists". It didn't make it true.

I'll continue to call them anti-women fundies.

[ismnotwasm]

76. Vomit

Has a useful function.

[RainDog]

25. Susan B. Anthony died in 1906 - long before Roe v. Wade

how can you make a poll and mention someone who was born before any legislative issue and think that's a poll worth participating in?

Anthony was a product of her time.

Why don't you also do a poll and ask if you think it's okay to deport African-Americans to Africa since Abraham Lincoln indicated he would support such a measure and thought about it often?

it's the same sort of ridiculous call back.

[ZombieHorde]

37. I am not asking people if abortions are OK, I am asking if a feminist can be pro-life.

I believe Anthony was a feminist, but I don't know if Lincoln was racist or not. Anthony's motivation was morality, I don't know Lincoln's motivation.

[RainDog]

39. you're making an assumption that Anthony would hold the same opinion now

as she did at that time.

What's the name of a women who currently holds political power or advocates for the same who currently thinks that it's okay to deny women reproductive rights and the right to make decisions about her own life and body b/c of the coercion of the state by the passage of laws that discriminate against female health care based upon their reproductive organs.

[RainDog]

41. that's someone you should ask about

- the question, I suppose, could be framed in this way -

Do you think Sarah Palin is a feminist or an Uncle Tomasina for religious intrusion into female health care choices

[ZombieHorde]

46. You assumed I assumed. The only thing I have assumed about Anthony is that the information I

have read about her is mostly accurate.

[RainDog]

73. the point, I guess - is I don't think her stance is relevant to today

in any case - hugs and take care.

[ismnotwasm]

86. Here, doesn't answer your question, but

Opening Session of the 1st Anniversary Meeting of the American Equal Rights Association, May 9, 1867, New York,

SUSAN B. ANTHONY, in behalf of the Executive Committee, reported the following resolutions for consideration:

Resolved, That as republican institutions are based on individual rights, and not on the rights of races or sexes, the first question for the American people to settle in the reconstruction of the government, is the RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS.

Resolved, That the present claim for "manhood suffrage," masked with the words "equal," "impartial," "universal," is a cruel abandonment of the slave women of the South, a fraud on the tax-paying women of the North, and an insult to the civilization of the nineteenth century.

Resolved, That the proposal to reconstruct our government on the basis of manhood suffrage, which emanated from the Republican party and has received the recent sanction of the American Anti-Slavery Society, is but a continuation of the old system of class and caste legislation, always cruel and proscriptive in itself, and ending in all ages in national degradation and revolution.

On motion of Miss ANTHONY, a Finance Committee was appointed, consisting of Harriet Purvis, Mary F. Gilbert, Charles Lenox Remond, and Anna Rice Powell.

On motion of CHARLES C. BURLEIGH, a Business Committee was appointed, consisting of Ernestine L. Rose, Susan B. Anthony, Parker Pillsbury, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, Frances D. Gage, and Samuel J. May.

Or-------------------------
Proceedings of the Woman's Rights Convention, Held at the Broadway Tabernacle, in the City of New York, on Tuesday and Wednesday, Sept. 6th and 7th, 1853, by the Woman's Rights Convention, New York, NY, 1853. (New York, NY: Fowlers and Wells, Publishers, 1853). 96 pp

SUSAN B. ANTHONY spoke in these words: —

"During my attendance at the New York State Teacher's Convention, lately held in Rochester, my attention was attracted to the condition of that class of women who teach in our public schools. Five hundred delegates were enrolled as members of that Convention, of whom three hundred were women; and yet men alone occupied all the offices of the Convention; they constituted the business committees, prepared the reports, and were entrusted exclusively with the management of the various subjects which came before the Convention; nor did any of the reports, until the close of the second day, allude to women as having any interest whatever in the profession of teaching Nearly at the closeof the first day's proceedings, an appeal was made to the teachers present to sustain the ‘New York Teacher,’ which is the organ of the New York State Teachers' Association. Ladies were not then forgotten; their existence was at once recognized when the pecuniary aid was to be solicited, and they were appealed to to be liberal in contributing to the support of that paper.

On the morning of the third day, which was the last, the president, on taking the chair, remarked that it was frequently asked why women were not appointed on the Committees, to bring in reports, and take part generally in the business of the meeting. He said, ‘I will answer only for one.’ Then, standing in a very dignified position, meant to enforce every word he uttered, he said: ‘Look at this beautiful hall — behold each pilaster, each pedestal, each shaft, and each entablature, the crowning glory of the whole — all contributes, each in its proper place, to the strength, symmetry, and beauty of this magnificent structure. Could I aid in bringing this beautiful entablature from its proud elevation, and placing it in the dust and dirt which surrounds the pedestal? Never!’ Now, what do you suppose was the effect of this oration on the women present? There was a general look from woman to woman; and, as they surveyed their ribbons, laces, brooches, and pins, the look said, as plainly as possible, ‘beautiful! really beautiful!!’ They, no doubt, thought themselves sisters of the angels. Not a woman rose to speak till toward the close of the last session.

During the whole time, the great burden upon the souls of those men seemed to be their anxiety to take measures for elevating the profession of teaching to a level with the clerical, medical, and legal professions. The various details to this consummation were considered. The low



compensation of teachers, which had the effect in many instances of making the profession a mere stepping-stone to the others, was reviewed. At last a member remarked, that it seemed to her that the great obstacle was entirely overlooked. She said: ‘The public sentiment holds woman to be incapable of becoming acquainted with the mysteries of law, medicine, and theology; and yet, it is granted to her to fill the highest offices as a teacher. So long, then, as you, men teachers, consent to compete with women, you must be content to be considered as occupying no more than the level of her mental capacity.’ Next came the election of new officers. A motion was made that a lady should fill the office of Vice-President, but it was lost. There was an attempt made to have a lady chosen as Secretary, but this also failed. A few words spoken by one woman seemed to give others courage; and one of the teachers of our city rose and said that the Convention had been called in order that the teachers of the State might take counsel together, to aid the cause of education; but the result would seem to show that a few men came for the purpose of elevating themselves, while the large number of women present were entirely forgotten. ‘I am,’ she said, ‘teacher and principal of one of the free schools in this city, performing the same labor as gentlemen who fill a like office. I receive two hundred and fifty dollars a year, while my brother receives six hundred and fifty dollars a year, for the same services.’

While she was making these remarks, the President called her to order! I acknowledge she was out of order, there not being a motion before the house; but, it seems, women are always out of order; therefore, she might as well be standing as sitting. She had given resolutions to the Secretary: they were read, but not acted on; neither did there seem to be any disposition to call them up; and she judged, from that fact, that the Convention did not design paying attention to subjects interesting women. However, they were subsequently brought forward.

In this State there are eleven thousand teachers, and of these, four-fifths are women. By the reports it will be seen that, of the annual State fund of £800,000, two-thirds are paid to men, and one-third to women; that is to say, two thirds are paid to one-fifth of the laborers in the cause of education, while four-fifths of these laborers are paid with one-third of the fund! And yet, they are satisfied. A gentleman said: ‘The majority of the women here would nor prepare reports, nor act in the Convention, even if voted for, just as it happened in the



Massachusetts’ Convention. Thus, because all were not in favor of it, none would be permitted to exercise the right."


I can't link to my sources which are a whole bunch of speeches and letters and such, because of restricted access, and right now, I don't have time to look relavant ones. However, Susan B. was a product of her times, and didn't even know the word 'feminist' the question isn't was she one, she wasn't, they didn't exist in modern form in her time. We can certainly consider her one in retrospect. A hell of a woman, who never cast of vote for all her very hard work, DIED before the suffrage was achieved. She is deserving a little more respect, I think than a word game debate on the internet.


You won't call a repuke a repuke, but you make fun of women's suffrage? Bad. Bad boy.

[ZombieHorde]

89. Where did I make fun of women's sufferage? nt

[ismnotwasm]

92. Oh, you're serious? The poll?

No fucking way. You can't, like, actually be serious, right?

[ZombieHorde]

94. I am serious. Be specific, where I am making fun of women's sufferage?

Surprise me with an honest answer.

[wickerwoman]

26. No. You can't be anti-choice and a feminist.

"Feminism is the radical notion that women are people." ~Cheris Kramarae and Paula Treichler

You can't accept that women are people and then deny their right to bodily autonomy and integrity.

That's like asking if someone can support chattel slavery of African Americans and not be a racist.

[ZombieHorde]

30. Do you think Susan B. Anthony was a misogynist?

I don't think so.

[wickerwoman]

33. I don't know enough about her to say one way or the other.

But if she was living in the modern context and was anti-choice I would not define her as a feminist.

[WatsonT]

38. Apparently old Susan B hated women

Who knew?

[Luminous Animal]

45. Why are you advancing this lie that Susan B. Anthony was anti-abortion?

Susan B. Anthony's views on abortion are, quite simply, unknown.

[ZombieHorde]

51. Here is a link for you discussing the issue...

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/13/opinion/13schiff.html

[Luminous Animal]

67. I already read that. I don't think you did.

[ZombieHorde]

70. I did read it. I liked it because it offered a semi-balanced view point. nt

[Warren Stupidity]

83. So in summary

You use the language of the right in your poll ("pro-life"), you justify your misleading statements regarding Anthony by citing an article about the rightwing psuedo-feminists trying to claim Anthony as one of their own, and you appear to have missed this:

"What is generally not mentioned is that the essay argues against an anti-abortion law; its author did not believe legislation would resolve the issue of unwanted pregnancy. Also not mentioned is the vaporous textual trail. According to the editors of Anthony’s papers, the article is not hers."

From that article.

Oops.

[ZombieHorde]

96. Pro-life is the proper term for the stance.

If facts sway you, see for yourself. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pro-life

I know she did not write the article, but she did publish the article calling abortion child murder in her paper. Ron Paul had a paper with racist articles he did not write, but DUers believed this was evidence of Ron Paul's racism.

If she also had pro-abortion articles in her paper, then I would believe she was allowing a debate to happen in her publication.

Susan B. Anthony was also a part of the women's suffrage movement, which was pro-life.

[Johonny]

71. I think Susan B. Anthony live in a totally different era

Darwin was progressive for his era, today his ideas could be used to make him sound horribly non-progressive. And so anti-evolution people pull his ideas out of context with his era to do so. Discussing people out of context with the era they lived in is pointless and boring.

[ZombieHorde]

74. If the definition of feminist has changed, then Anthony may no longer be a feminist.

Saying Anthony is not a feminist does not diminish anything she has done, it just means that label does not apply to her.

For the record, I do think Anthony was a feminist.

[wickerwoman]

93. You can say she was a feminist within the context of her own time period

without saying she is a feminist within the context of ours.

Hell, Lincoln was a Republican but that doesn't mean anything today because the party platform of 1860s Republicans is not the same as the party platform of 2010 Republicans.

Fifty years ago there was no conflict between being a Democrat and also supporting the most virulently racist, segregationist assholes who have ever run in history. Not true today.

George Wallace was a Democrat. What does that tell you about either George Wallace or Democrats from the modern understanding of either?

So what's the point of applying modern understanding of terms to people who lived in a completely different context?

[ZombieHorde]

95. In my opinion, Susan B. Anthony was a feminist.

The point is honest disagreements are OK. I believe someone can belong to a group, and not follow the group's opinions on every subject.

I don't think all pro-lifers are motivated by the desire to control women. I am pro-choice, but I don't think we should demonize every single pro-lifer.

I think some pro-lifers are truly motivated by morality and religion, so a feminist can be pro-life.

I guess I am advocating a fluent definition for feminism, as opposed to a rigid definition.

[wickerwoman]

98. She was a first wave feminist.

We're currently well into the third wave. We don't really need a new definition of feminism. Just read up on the history of the movement on wikipedia.

Just because Newton didn't have the same opinion as Einstein about gravity doesn't mean that they both weren't physicists. It just means they entered the same discussion at different points in its development. What would Newton's opinion of string theory be? Who knows? In his day, serious scientists still studied alchemy. The only way to determine it would be to bring him to the present, give him time to catch up on all the developments and then ask him.

Same with Susan B. Anthony on abortion. In 1906, obstetrics was just beginning to emerge as a medical discipline. Almost nothing was known about fetal development. Ultrasounds didn't exist until 1961. If Susan B. Anthony knew what a blastocyst was, what would her opinion of aborting one be? Who knows?

And as for anti-choicers, whether or not they are motivated by religious conviction that life begins at conception or not is irrelevant. The fact is that they do not respect the right of women, as *people*, to make their own decisions about what is happening inside their own bodies. And therefore they cannot be feminists because they are not recognizing and respecting the personhood of women.

That doesn't imply that they are theocratic control-freaks one step away from the Handmaid's Tale, but it does mean that they are simply not feminists in the modern understanding of the word.

[ZombieHorde]

100. Seems like you are advocating for fluid definitions. nt

[AlabamaLibrul]

36. Pro life yes, anti-choice no. Simple as that nt

[Myrina]

43. Not in the way "Pro Life" is currently defined.

... if the definition of the current movement to control women's reproduction and ban abortions is more appropriately re-named "Anti Choice" and if "Pro Life" is redefined to stand for what those words ACTUALLY mean, then yes one could be pro-life and be a feminist.

[ZombieHorde]

106. Pro-life actually does mean the criminalization of abortion.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pro-life

[LynneSin]

47. How can you be pro-life and one of the 40 GOP senators who voted against our senior citizens?

How can you be pro-life, like Eric Cantor, and tell the people of Missouri they won't get any money until the budget is resolved.

How can you be pro-life and take away healthcare for children or money for better education.

How can you be pro-life and support endless wars or the death penalty.

nuff said.

[ZombieHorde]

61. Pro-life is about abortion, so those other topics are off topic. nt

[Luminous Animal]

48. FYI, I am pro-choice and pro-life. I reject the right wing frame of what it means to be pro-life.

[BOG PERSON]

49. susan b. anthony was a racist

so i think the really pressing question here is, can you be anti-abortion, a feminist, AND a racist?

[ZombieHorde]

58. I have never heard/read about Anthony being racist. Do you have a link? nt

[BOG PERSON]

77. well

she and elizabeth cady stanton opposed the 15th amendment. see here.

[ZombieHorde]

80. That would be strong evidence of racism. If you ever run across evidence for this, please send it to

me.

[tammywammy]

90. I wouldn't call Stanton and Anthony racist

They were very disappointed that the 15th Amendment didn't include sex. They were both fierce abolitionist.

[saras]

52. Easy - provide women with whatever it takes to make abortions obsolete

If women and girls (anyone capable of getting pregnant, really) have
the power
the self-esteem
the education
the access to birth control
the access to respectful doctors with complete privacy
The acknowledgment that whatever opinions others may have, ultimately the decision is theirs alone

the number of abortions could be reduced to the point where they could be addressed on an individual basis.

I'm all for it. I consider this fairly normal progressive values. OF COURSE we want these things in our society.

If you don't want to take on changing the whole world, then oppose individual abortions one at a time by providing these things for girls one at a time.

The poll is missing the position "pro-life, but pro-abortion as a choice", or "pro-life but anti-guilt"

[joeybee12]

54. Susan B Anthony WAS a feminist and she was NOT anti-choice!

Do some research...the supposed article she wrote she did not write.

[ZombieHorde]

57. She did not write it, she published it. She was involved in the sufferage movement which was

against abortion.

Remember when DUers pointed out the racist writings in Ron Paul's paper? Everyone said it was evidence he was racist, even though he did not write the articles. He published them.

[Gormy Cuss]

55. Please hold up your leg.

I voted option # 3.

[LadyHawkAZ]

59. I voted No, but I disagree with the idea that Anthony

was not a "real feminist". That's a false dichotomy. Anthony was a product of a different era, where abortion was illegal and often deadly, birth control was almost nonexistent and motherhood was held to be the highest ideal for womanhood. Scientific advances, education and increasingly open career fields have changed the perspective of what "womanhood" means and can be. I suspect Anthony would probably have been pro-choice in the modern age, but that's jmo.

[ZombieHorde]

62. We would all probably be different if we were born during another time or place. nt

[LadyHawkAZ]

63. Yes, and it makes comparisons like that one impossible

that's like saying Mary Wollstonecraft wasn't a "real feminist". For her time, she was not just a feminist but an extremist feminist. So was Anthony. But the time and conditions were different, and times have changed.

[ZombieHorde]

64. I am not making a comparison. nt

[LadyHawkAZ]

66. Then I think I have misunderstood the poll questions...?

[ZombieHorde]

68. The poll was about the definition of the word feminist, but it has turned into something else.

Another way of asking the poll question would be, "is being pro-choice mandatory to be considered a feminist?"

[saras]

75. Sort of - you can be anti-choice for yourself but you have to be pro-choice for other women

You're free to dislike their choices and try to convince them to make other ones, you're just not allowed to use compulsion, legal, moral, or otherwise, to force choices on those women who disagree with you.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

65. Only if you are also pro-choice and not try to control other women's values with your own.

[Raine]

79. Yes a person is entitled to their opinion as long

as they don't use that opinion to infringe on others who have a different opinion.

[treestar]

81. Actually ran across a feminist theory on this

Years ago, I read a lot on feminism, and don't know where it was from. But the basic idea was that women have children and they shouldn't feel that it is ever wrong. The reasons for getting the abortion generally are about the patriarchy's rules - not having a child out of wedlock - women would get abortions rather than be caught being a pregnant when single. Or didn't have enough money to raise a child, and they thought society should not allow that to become an issue. Having a baby is natural to a woman and she should never feel that she has to do otherwise.

Very interesting stuff.

[REP]

88. False choice. No real feminist TODAY is anti-choice

Anthony believed women were aborting because men made the decision for them.

[tammywammy]

91. Men making the decision because so many felt they had no choice

Plus, abortions were very dangerous back then.

One will never know how Anthony would have felt at this era about abortion, after Roe v Wade.

It's like if one was going on about Stanton being a republican. Yes she was a republican, the type that fought for the abolition of slavery and equal rights of women - not the republican party of today.

[LeftishBrit]

99. I think it's almost impossible to equate the attitudes of people 150 years ago with modern politics

Many anti-slavery activists had some views that would be considered racist nowadays. Many campaigners for democracy never considered the possibility that women could vote. Etc.

As regards the direct question about whether a person nowadays can be both 'pro-life' and a feminist: yes, as individuals they can, and I know such people, thoug not many. However, I think it's almost impossible to be actively involved in modern political pro-life movements and to be a feminist. Firstly, most such movements come with 'traditional family values' packages that are profoundly anti-feminist. Secondly, they usually come with the implication that at best it is better to vote for a right-wing pro-life candidate than a liberal/left pro-choice candidate, or at worst that right-wing parties are always preferable as they are more likely to be pro-life. Right-wing parties and feminism, or any sort of equal rights, rarely go together. Thirdly, they are almost always focused *just* on the behaviour of women who have abortions, and are indifferent to other threats to prenatal and infant life: e.g. they rarely campaign for improved prenatal care, or express concern about the horrifying differences in infant mortality levels between rich and poor people,

[LeftinOH]

102. The term "pro life" implies that some people are "anti life". It's RW terminology, not reality.

[ZombieHorde]

105. No, pro-life is proper English.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pro-life

[KamaAina]

104. I voted "Punching in the shin"

Susan B. Anthony never met today's anti-choicers. She might have felt very differently if she'd seen them shame African American women on their way out of a New Orleans clinic, while reserving their fanatical efforts to actually block the entrance for the few white women who showed up.

[Iggo]

107. Can a person be anti-abortion and pro-choice?

If so, then so.

[ZombieHorde]

108. A person can be anti-abortion and pro-choice, but a person can not be

pro-life and pro-choice.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pro-life