• Survey
  • About
    • Mission
    • The GAB Team
      • Emily Heroy
      • Colleen Hodgetts
      • Kyle Bachan
      • Laura Beaulne-Stuebing
      • Tanya Castle
      • Avory Faucette
      • Atifa Hasham
      • Chally Kacelnik
      • Ashley Lauren
      • Amy Littlefield
      • Avital Nathman
      • Carrie Nelson
      • Nadia Smiecinska
      • Spectra Speaks
      • Henrike Dessaules
      • Fatma El-Nahry
      • Charlotte Jalvingh
      • Jessica Megarry
      • Imen Yacoubi
      • Leticia Zenevich
      • Contributing Writers
    • Newsletter
    • Copyright
    • Comments
    • Contact
  • Feminist Resources
    • Global Feminist Link Love
    • Series
    • Blogroll
Gender Across Borders
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Activism
  • Health
  • Education
  • Film & TV
  • Literature
  • Music
  • Queer Issues
  • Race/Ethnicity
It's survey time! We're working on an exciting new project here at GAB, and you can help! Click here for more information.

Occupying Reproductive Justice

December 2, 2011 10:00 am 2 comments

Share this Article

  • TwitterTwitter
  • FacebookFacebook
  • DeliciousDelicious
  • DiggDigg
  • StumbleuponStumble
  • RedditReddit

Author:

Anna Lekas Miller

Tags:

Birth control occupy reproductive justice Occupy Wall Street OWS reproductive health reproductive justice

Image credit: Birthattendants.com

We are the ninety-nine percent—of women who need to use birth control.

In August, the US Department of Health and Human Services accepted the Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) recommendation that birth control, from traditional oral contraceptives to the morning after pill and intra-uterine devices (IUDS, be covered under the Affordable Care Act as preventative healthcare.

At the time, feminist reproductive health advocates in the United States rejoiced—it had been a long few months of mostly rich, withered white men holding hearings on H.R. 3 (legislation that would defund private insurance companies that covered abortion in their plans), seriously considering federally defunding Planned Parenthood—and then proceeding to defund them at the state level, and the stress and stigma of having one of our most personal and fundamental choices in the control of an out of touch and unsympathetic state.

Despite the unlikely victory, the mandate was still far from perfect. For one, it privileged insured women over uninsured women—these nineteen million women are all low-income, and disproportionately black and Latina. Reproductive choice, as it would seem, was still reserved for the employed, mostly white women of means—a demographic that is quickly becoming passé as a tidal wave of economic crisis takes more and more victims.

In addition, the original mandate included an optional exemption for organizations that morally oppose contraception. This would mean that the multi-billion dollar Catholic healthcare industry (servicing one out of five of every hospital beds in the United States in addition to all religiously-affiliated health clinics in colleges and communities) would theoretically have the power to refuse birth control access.

Now, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops have taken it upon themselves to make sure that this is not a choice only for healthcare provided by religiously-affiliated organizations that oppose contraception, but also for healthcare sponsored by individual employers that happen to object to contraception coverage for their own personal moral and religious reasons. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is not a fringe organization of priests—it is a powerful, political lobby that is actively meeting with President Barack Obama to legislate their religious beliefs—despite the inconvenient reality that the vast majority of Catholic women actively use birth control.

So, yesterday at noon, I headed downtown to an emergency rally organized by NARAL New York, passing out flyers urging passersby to call the White House, and demand President Obama not to cave to the bishops’ demands.

I arrived and only fifteen other people were there.

There is a slough of excuses—it’s getting cold. It was organized only two days ago. It was at lunchtime. Only those of us who are students, freelancers, self-employed, unemployed, and underemployed can manage to carve time in our days to come to a lunchtime rally…

But wait a moment—isn’t there an almost comically geographically proximate movement that is rallying just these very people?

In any other political moment of my life, I would have understood the low turnout—with this particular set of circumstances, it is to be expected. However, we are not in an ordinary political time—we are in the age of #occupy, and this particular rally was only one quarter of a mile away from Liberty Plaza—the once cradle of the revolution—itself.

I know that the two movements are not only two different causes, but also two very different modes of activism. While one movement has built itself into an international phenomenon through a range of occupations, massive rallies, sit-ins, and other forms of creative protest—often facing police brutality, and revealing a myriad of structures that reflect corporate corruption in the United States, the other tirelessly organizes to elect pro-choice politicians, protect access to reproductive healthcare, and spread the message to do both. One is trying to build a new world on the shattered remains of a broken system, the other is trying to replace a broken system with something that is structurally similar, but ideologically radically different.

Still, reproductive justice and economic justice are intrinsically intertwined together. Politically, reproductive choice is quickly becoming a privilege rather than a right—though the numbers are not as stark as the bottom ninety-nine percent versus the top one percent, the privatization of healthcare is quickly eradicating the middle class of birth control users. If this persists, women who become pregnant will have no choice but to become mothers, pushing them further into poverty. How are women who can’t control their reproductive futures going begin to be able to control their economic futures?

I am familiar with both causes. I have reported, been inspired, and taken to the streets for both of them. I have acknowledged that they are different—but in this time of solidarity, where we can feel our unprecedented people power forcing social change, isn’t it more necessary to acknowledge the overlap between both movements, lending energy to one another in times of need?

Like Gender Across Borders on Facebook. Follow us on Twitter and Tumblr. Subscribe to our monthly newsletter. UPDATE: to take part in our survey regarding international feminism, click here.

2 Comments

  • Claire
    December 2, 2011
    1:04 pm

    It is of the utmost importance that low-income women still have access to Planned Parenthood because if they do not, there will be even more children born into poverty. The reduction or removal of funding for Planned Parenthood would inevitably put more children into the welfare program. Additionally, some of these mothers would put their kids into the already crowded foster care system. If the lawmakers are considering the monetary trickle-down effect, it will be more expensive for the government to put funds into welfare and foster care than continuing their support of Planned Parenthood.

  • Carol
    December 2, 2011
    2:23 pm

    I represent parents whose children are in the care of the Dept. of Human Service because of dependency and/or neglect. The children, by and large, have not been abused. They are the victims of parents who cannot provide for them. Clare is right on.

    Additionally, it is interesting to note that the “pro-life” movement believes that life begins at conception, and therefore, all abortifacients should be illegal. This includes the pill, IUDs, etc.

    When abortion was first legalized in the ’70, it was the number 1 killer of women. It was the AMA that fought for its legalization because doctors where tired of trying to safe women from botched back-alley abortions. I don’t think this battle will be won again until doctors step up again. Sorry to be grim, but there you have it.

    Great article, Anna

Latest Global Gender Justice News

  • New Project! We need your help!

    New Project! We need your help!

  • Start Improving the World: Goodbye, Gender Across Borders

    Start Improving the World: Goodbye, Gender Across Borders

  • Global Feminist Link Love: April 21 – 27

    Global Feminist Link Love: April 21 – 27

  • Male, female, hetero, homo: does the binarism really exist or are we making it up?

    Male, female, hetero, homo: does the binarism really exist or are we making it up?

  • Essentialism, constructionism, and why I like plaid

    Essentialism, constructionism, and why I like plaid

  • Understanding my sexuality through queer theory

    Understanding my sexuality through queer theory

  • Dangers of identity politics: does science hold all the answers?

    Dangers of identity politics: does science hold all the answers?

  • Profile of a “Gaysian”

    Profile of a “Gaysian”

  • “Yes I am too, but am I really?” On queerness and socialization.

    “Yes I am too, but am I really?” On queerness and socialization.

  • Welcome to the series “Born this way? The role of the nature vs nurture debate in sexual identity formation and acceptance”!

    Welcome to the series “Born this way? The role of the nature vs nurture debate in sexual identity formation and acceptance”!

  • Unpacking my daddy issues

    Unpacking my daddy issues

  • Women’s Solidarity: Speaking With One Voice for Equality

    Women’s Solidarity: Speaking With One Voice for Equality

  • Report Addresses Gender Gap in London

    Report Addresses Gender Gap in London

  • Integration, Honor and Women in Germany

    Integration, Honor and Women in Germany

  • A Question of Royalty: How Black Princesses are Faring on the International Stage

    A Question of Royalty: How Black Princesses are Faring on the International Stage

  • Global Feminist Link Love: April 14-20

    Global Feminist Link Love: April 14-20

  • Women in the Middle

    Women in the Middle

  • Malawi: New President and New Media

    Malawi: New President and New Media

  • Illusions of Abandonment: Euro-orphans in Poland’s Immigrant Families

    Illusions of Abandonment: Euro-orphans in Poland’s Immigrant Families

  • Chasing Elusive Dreams: The Quandary of Zimbabwean Women

    Chasing Elusive Dreams: The Quandary of Zimbabwean Women

← previous next →
Gender Across Borders
  • Mission
  • Contact Us
  • Comments Policy
    search:
    © Copyright 2013 — Gender Across Borders. All Rights Reserved Designed by WPZOOM