Summary: Transforming The Pro-Choice Movement By Loretta Ross
In the article, “Understanding Reproductive Justice: Transforming the Pro-Choice Movement,” the author, Loretta Ross, argues that while the pro-choice movement has achieved great strides in terms of acquiring and protecting legal abortion rights for women, it has done very little to address and/or challenge the structural inequalities that many women, especially women of color and lower class, have to face when simply trying to access and control their reproductive rights and destiny. Because of this, Loretta Ross proposes that we shift from using the term “pro-choice” when it comes to defining our movement to using a term that is more inclusive and representative of the realities that many non-white women have to face—this term being called “Reproductive Justice.” As was beautifully described in the beginning of her piece, Ross defines Reproductive Justice as being “the complete physical, mental, spiritual, political, social, and economic well-being of women
…show more content…
and girls, based on full achievement and protection of women’s human rights” (14).
Given this definition of Reproductive Justice as well as the amount of influence that intersectionality and intersectional analysis has had on feminist scholars, it is no secret as to why recent generations of women are much more understanding and accepting of this intersectional analysis and approach to women’s reproductive rights and, quite frankly, overall women’s rights. However, what really struck me from Ross’ reading was the fact that some supporters of the pro-choice movement, especially white women and older feminists, have actually found it insulting and offensive for us to say that “pro-choice” is not inclusive of all women in regards to their race, class, and sexuality to name a few. As was explained in the reading, these white women and older feminists take offense that even though they were the ones fighting to give women the right to choose, we
would still argue that their work is exclusive of women with disadvantaged backgrounds and realities. This specific portion of the reading stood out to me because I believe it perfectly highlights and is emblematic of the internal split that we now see with feminism. Although under the lens of abortion, this example clearly demonstrates that while the overall goal was to give women rights in every sense of the word, the split took place when feminists failed to realized the impact that differing race, class, sexuality, etc. would have on women, especially women of color, when it comes to accessing and exercising their “rights.” Moreover, this section of the reading also helped me open my eyes to the fact even though the majority of women of today may be more understanding and knowledgeable of the structural inequalities that discriminate against specific groups of women, there may still be (and are) a number of older feminists and even white women who still refuse to acknowledge these unfortunate realities due to their outdated school of thought.
Because of this dilemma, it has led me to ask the questions of how we, as women, can begin to bridge the gap between women and their opposing (yet similar) stances. While there are pro-choice women who resist the reproductive justice approach that Ross is proposing, there are other women who simply resist and reject feminism altogether. While this question may be impossible to answer, it does, however, at least begin the conversation that’ll focus on the ways our generation of feminists can learn from the movement’s past mistakes and not only learn to avoid them, but also to find a more constructive and effective way of consolidating and uniting all women, not just feminists, reproductive justice feminists, or pro-choice feminists. The key is to unite all women, not discriminate against each other, as it is our united struggle and our united fight. The second we let disputes and differences get in the way, they—white conservative men—begin to look for more ways to regulate and control women and women’s bodies.
and girls, based on full achievement and protection of women’s human rights” (14).
Given this definition of Reproductive Justice as well as the amount of influence that intersectionality and intersectional analysis has had on feminist scholars, it is no secret as to why recent generations of women are much more understanding and accepting of this intersectional analysis and approach to women’s reproductive rights and, quite frankly, overall women’s rights. However, what really struck me from Ross’ reading was the fact that some supporters of the pro-choice movement, especially white women and older feminists, have actually found it insulting and offensive for us to say that “pro-choice” is not inclusive of all women in regards to their race, class, and sexuality to name a few. As was explained in the reading, these white women and older feminists take offense that even though they were the ones fighting to give women the right to choose, we
would still argue that their work is exclusive of women with disadvantaged backgrounds and realities. This specific portion of the reading stood out to me because I believe it perfectly highlights and is emblematic of the internal split that we now see with feminism. Although under the lens of abortion, this example clearly demonstrates that while the overall goal was to give women rights in every sense of the word, the split took place when feminists failed to realized the impact that differing race, class, sexuality, etc. would have on women, especially women of color, when it comes to accessing and exercising their “rights.” Moreover, this section of the reading also helped me open my eyes to the fact even though the majority of women of today may be more understanding and knowledgeable of the structural inequalities that discriminate against specific groups of women, there may still be (and are) a number of older feminists and even white women who still refuse to acknowledge these unfortunate realities due to their outdated school of thought.
Because of this dilemma, it has led me to ask the questions of how we, as women, can begin to bridge the gap between women and their opposing (yet similar) stances. While there are pro-choice women who resist the reproductive justice approach that Ross is proposing, there are other women who simply resist and reject feminism altogether. While this question may be impossible to answer, it does, however, at least begin the conversation that’ll focus on the ways our generation of feminists can learn from the movement’s past mistakes and not only learn to avoid them, but also to find a more constructive and effective way of consolidating and uniting all women, not just feminists, reproductive justice feminists, or pro-choice feminists. The key is to unite all women, not discriminate against each other, as it is our united struggle and our united fight. The second we let disputes and differences get in the way, they—white conservative men—begin to look for more ways to regulate and control women and women’s bodies.