Christina Sommers has been very consistent in her pro-choice position. She’s always supported a “woman’s right” to choose abortion*, and has always opposed government funding for abortion. She sees it as a freedom, not an entitlement. Despite this, “rationalwiki” claims that her views have modified. This article is informative, but somewhat slanted, as it follows Sommers unique life as a feminist and seems to describe her as drifting away from feminism. On abortion, their claim that she has “modified” her stance on abortion is based in part on her position that abortion should not be pushed onto women who oppose it for religious or other reasons. Yeah, that’s called being pro-choice…as opposed to being pro-abortion. Many so-called pro-choicers are actually pro-abortion, such as by opposing even so much as a 24 hour waiting period for a woman seeking an abortion, or requiring women receive some basic medical information. Sommers just wants women to have the choice, she isn’t trying to make it happen.
The “rationalwiki” article’s other justification for saying she’s “modified” her position is the following quote:
“I find it appalling that there is such a disregard for what is in fact a majority of our countrymen [pro-lifers] who view it differently, and some passionately. Rather than attack them as somehow engaged in some kind of dark conspiracy against women’s bodies, we have to understand why they hold these positions… and why it’s not going away as a moral question.”
So, she recognizes that prolifers have other reasons for opposing abortion than being “anti-woman”, or trying to control women. I’m pro-life, and have no desire to control women. I want to stop the termination of an innocent life. If women don’t want a baby, and use birth control, that’s their choice.
What this really boils down to, as you can see from the general tone of the “rationalwiki” article, is that Christine Sommers is an independent feminist, rather than just another vitriolic, rape-fear mongering, male basher spouting talking points about a non-existent patriarchy. Sommers is a true feminist in that she believes women are equal to men, and will likewise stand up for men by the same standard. This has caused her to be perceived by others as an “anti-feminist”, which the article admits. However, the article falls into the same kind of paradigm thinking, assuming that feminism is what we are led to believe it is, rather than what it is actually.
Today’s “feminists”, after a lengthy male bashing tirade, and denouncing fellow women who don’t conform to the current “third wave of feminism”, or pretending to speak on behalf of all woman kind, then quote the dictionary definition of feminism, as follows:
“the belief that men and women should have equal rights and opportunities” from Merriam Webster
Most self-identified feminists have little in common with this definition, but Christine Sommers is the real deal. Due to Sommers’s courageous stand for gender equality, many in the “feminist movement”, particularly the “third wave”, find it hard to accept that she really does believe in women’s rights, including abortion.* Her consistency and devotion to gender equality puts the modern “feminist” movement to shame.
*For the record, I do not consider abortion to be a “woman’s right” or anyone’s right. Nobody has the right to kill an innocent unborn child. I do believe in a woman’s right to use birth control, and with that right, I fail to see why abortion is necessary. Don’t want to get pregnant, buy a $1 condom!