RSN Fundraising Banner
FB Share
Email This Page
add comment
Print

Traister writes: "I have been thinking, like so many people this week, about rage. Who I'm mad at, what that anger's good for, how what makes me maddest is the way the madness has long gone unrespected, even by those who have relied on it for their gains."

'This week, the most aggressive abortion bans since Roe v. Wade swept through states, explicitly designed to challenge and ultimately reverse Roe at the Supreme Court level.' (photo: Michael Williamson/Getty Images)
'This week, the most aggressive abortion bans since Roe v. Wade swept through states, explicitly designed to challenge and ultimately reverse Roe at the Supreme Court level.' (photo: Michael Williamson/Getty Images)


Our Fury Over Abortion Was Dismissed for Decades as Hysterical

By Rebecca Traister, The Cut

18 May 19

 

have been thinking, like so many people this week, about rage. Who I’m mad at, what that anger’s good for, how what makes me maddest is the way the madness has long gone unrespected, even by those who have relied on it for their gains.

For as long as I have been a cogent adult, and actually before that, I have watched people devote their lives, their furious energies, to fighting against the steady, merciless, punitive erosion of reproductive rights. And I have watched as politicians — not just on the right, but members of my own party — and the writers and pundits who cover them, treat reproductive rights and justice advocates as if they were fantasists enacting dystopian fiction.

This week, the most aggressive abortion bans since Roe v. Wade swept through states, explicitly designed to challenge and ultimately reverse Roe at the Supreme Court level. With them has come the dawning of a broad realization — a clear, bright, detailed vision of what’s at stake, and what’s ahead. (If not, yet, full comprehension of the harm that has already been done).

As it comes into view, I am of course livid at the Republican Party that has been working toward this for decades. These right-wing ghouls — who fulminate idiotically about how women could still be allowed to get abortions before they know they are pregnant (Alabama’s Clyde Chambliss) or try to legislate the medically impossible removal of ectopic pregnancy and reimplantation into the uterus (Ohio’s John Becker) — are the stuff of unimaginably gothic horror. Ever since Roe was decided in 1973, conservatives have been laboring to roll back abortion access, with absolutely zero knowlege of or interest in how reproduction works. And all the while, those who have been trying to sound the alarm have been shooed off as silly hysterics.

Which is why I am almost as mad at many on the left, theoretically on the side of reproductive rights and justice, who have refused, somehow, to see this coming or act aggressively to forestall it. I have no small amount of rage stored for those in the Democratic Party who have relied on the engaged fury of voters committed to reproductive autonomy to elect them, at the same time that they have treated the efforts of activists trying to stave off this future as inconvenient irritants.

This includes, of course, the Democrats (notably Joe Biden) who long supported the Hyde Amendment, the legislative rider that has barred the use of federal insurance programs from paying for abortion, making reproductive health care inaccessible to poor women since 1976. During health-care reform, Barack Obama referred to Hyde as a “tradition” and questions of abortion access as “a distraction.” I’ve spent my life listening to Democrats call abortion a niche issue — and worse, one that is somehow repellent to voters, even though support for Roe is in fact among the most broadly popular positions of the Democratic Party; seven in ten Americans want abortion to remain legal, even in conservative states.

You can try to tell these Democrats this — lots of people have been trying to tell them for a while now — but it won’t matter; they will only explain to you (a furious person) that they (calm, wise, knowledgeable about politics) understand that we need a big tent and can’t have a litmus test and please be reasonable: we shouldn’t shut anyone out because of a difference on one issue. (That one issue that we shouldn’t shut people out because of is always abortion). Every single time Democrats come up with a new strategy to win purple and red areas, it is the same strategy: hey, let’s jettison abortion! (If you object to this, you will be told you are standing in the way of the greater progressive project).

I grew up in Pennsylvania, governed by anti-abortion Democrat Bob Casey Sr.; his son Bob Jr. is Pennsylvania’s senior senator now, and though he’s getting better on abortion, Jr. voted, in 2015 and 2018, for 20-week abortion bans. Maybe my rage stems from being raised with this particularly grim perspective on Democratic politics: dynasties of white men united in their dedication to restricting women’s bodily autonomy, but they’re Democrats so who else are you going to vote for? Which reminds me of Dan Lipinski, the virulently anti-abortion Democratic congressman — whose anti-abortion dad held his seat before him. The current DCCC leader, Cheri Bustos, is holding a big-dollar fundraiser for Lipinski’s reelection campaign, even though it’s 2019 and abortion is being banned and providers threatened with more jail time than rapists and there is someone else to vote for: Lipinski is being challenged in a primary by pro-choice progressive Democrat Marie Newman. And still, Bustos, a powerful woman and Democratic leader, is helping anti-choice Lipinski keep his seat for an eighth term. So I’ve been thinking about that part of my anger too.

Also about how, for years, I’ve listened to Democratic politicians distance themselves from abortion by calling it tragic and insisting it should be rare, instead of simply acknowledging it to be a crucial, legal cornerstone of comprehensive health care for women, people with uteruses, and their families. I have seethed as generations of Democrats have argued that if we could just get past abortion and focus instead on economic issues, we’d be better off. They never seem to get that abortion is an economic issue, and that what they think of as economic issues — from wages and health care to housing and education policy — are at the very heart of the reproductive justice movement, which understands access to abortion to be one (pivotal!) part of a far broader set of circumstances that determine if, when, under what circumstances, and with what resources human beings might have and raise children.

And no, of course it’s not just Democrats I’m mad at. It’s the pundits who approach abortion law as armchair coaches. I can’t do better in my fury on this front than the legal writer Scott Lemieux, who in 2007 wrote a blistering rundown of all the legal and political wags, including Ben Wittes and Jeffrey Rosen and Richard Cohen and William Saletan, then making arguments, some too cute by half, about how Roe was ultimately bad for abortion rights and for Democrats. Some like to cite an oft-distorted opinion put forth by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who has said that she wished the basis on which Roe was decided had included a more robust defense of women’s equality. Retroactive strategic chin-stroking about Roe is mostly moot, given the decades of intervening cases and that the fight against abortion is not about process but about the conviction that women should not control their own reproduction. It is also true that Ginsburg has been doing the work of aggressively defending reproductive rights for decades, while these pundits have treated them as a parlor game. As Lemieux put it then, it was unsurprising, “given the extent to which affluent men safely ensconced in liberal urban centers dominate the liberal pundit class,” that the arguments put forth, “greatly understate or ignore the stark class and geographic inequites in abortion access that would inevitably manifest themselves in a post-Roe world.”

Or, for that matter, that had already manifested themselves in a Roe world.

Because long before these new bans — which will meet years of legal challenge before they are enacted — abortion had grown ever less accessible to segments of America, though not the segments that the affluent men (and women) who write about and practice politics tend to emerge from. But yes, thanks to Hyde and the TRAP laws and the closed clinics and the long travel distances and paucity of providers and the economically untenable waiting periods, legions of women have already suffered, died, had children against their will, while columnists and political consultants have bantered about the necessity of Roe, and litmus tests and big tents. In vast portions of this country, Roe might as well not exist already.

And still those who are mad about, have been driven mad by, these injustices have been told that their fury is baseless, fictional, made of chewing gum and recycled copies of Our Bodies Ourselves. Last summer, the day before Anthony Kennedy announced his resignation from the Supreme Court, CNN host Brian Stelter tweeted, in response to a liberal activist, “We are not ‘a few steps from The Handmaids’ Tale.’ I don’t think this kind of fear-mongering helps anybody.” When protesters shouted at Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings a few weeks later, knowing full well what was about to happen and what it portended for Roe, Senator Ben Sasse condescended and lied to them, claiming that there have been “screaming protesters saying ‘women are going to die’ at every hearing for decades” and suggesting that this response was a form of “hysteria.”

It was the kind of dishonesty — issued from on high, from one of those Republicans who has inexplicably earned a reputation for being “reasonable” and “smart,” and who has enormous power over our future — that makes you want to pull the hair from your head and go screaming through the streets except someone would just tell you you were being hysterical.

And so here we are, the thing is happening and no one can pretend otherwise; it is not a game or a drill and those for whom the consequences — long real for millions whose warnings and peril have gone unheeded — are only now coming into focus want to know: what can be done?

First, never again let anyone tell you that the fury or determination to fight on this account is invalid, inappropriate, or inconvenient to a broader message. Consider that this is also what women and marginalized people are told all the time about their anger in general: that they should not express it, not let it out, because to give voice to their rage will distract from their aims, undermine them; that it will ultimately be bad for them. This messaging is strategic. It is designed to get angry people to keep their mouths shut. Because if they are successfully stifled, they will remain at the margins, isolated, alone in their fury. It is only if they start letting it out and acting on it and working in tandem with others who share their outrage that they might begin to form networks, coalitions, the building blocks of movements; it is when the anger is let loose that the organizing happens in earnest.

Second, seek the organizing that is already underway. In the days since this new round of state abortion bans have begun to pass and make headlines, secret Facebook groups have begun to form, in which freshly furious women have begun to talk of forming networks that would help patients evade barriers to access. Yet these organizations already exist, are founded and run by women of color, have long been transporting those in need of reproductive care to the facilities where they can get it; they are woefully underfunded. The trick is not to start something new, but to join forces with those who have long been angry about reproductive injustice.

“Abortion funds have been sounding the alarm for decades,” said Yamani Hernandez, who runs the National Network or Abortion Funds, which includes 76 local funds in 41 states, each of them helping women who face barriers getting the abortion care they need, offering money, transportation, housing, and help with logistics. Only 29 of the funds have paid staff; the rest are volunteer-run and led with average budget sizes of $75,000, according to Hernandez, who said that in 2017, 150,000 people called abortion funds for help — a number up from 100,000 in 2015, thanks to the barrage of restrictions that have made it so much harder for so many more people. With just $4 million to work with, the funds were able to help 29,000 of them last year: giving abortion funds money and time will directly help people who need it. Distinguishing the work of abortion funds from the policy fights in state houses and at the capitols, Hernandez said, “whatever happens in Washington, and changes in the future, women need to get care today.”

And whatever comes next, she said, it’s the people who have been doing this work for years who are likely to be best prepared to deal with the harm inflicted, which is a good place for the newly enraged to start. “If and when Roe is abolished,” said Hernandez, “the people who are going to be getting people to the care they need are those who have largely been navigating this already and are already well suited for the logistical challenges.”

The fights on the ground might be the most current and urgent in human terms, but there is also energy to be put into policy fights. In 2015, California Congresswoman Barbara Lee authored the EACH Woman Act, the first serious congressional challenge to the Hyde Amendment, which came after years of agitation and activism, especially by All Above All, a grassroots organization led by women of color and determined to make abortion accessible to everyone. Those who are looking for policy fights to lean into can call and write your representatives and candidates and demand that they support the EACH Woman Act.

Rage works. It takes time and numbers and a willingness to express it, but it is among the most reliable catalysts of social and political change. That’s the story of how grassroots activism can compel Barbara Lee to compel her caucus to take on Hyde. Her willingness to tackle it, and the righteous outrage of those who are driven to end the harm it does to poor women and women of color, in turn helped to compel Hillary Clinton to come out against Hyde in her 2016 primary campaign; opposition to Hyde is now — for the first time since it was passed in 1976 — a part of the Democratic Party’s platform.

In these past two years, fury at a Trump administration and at the Republican Party has driven electoral activism. And at the end of 2018, the Guttmacher Institute reported that 2018 was the first year since at least 2000 in which the number of state policies enacted to expand or protect abortion rights and access, and contraceptive access, outnumbered the number of state restrictions. Why? Because growing realization of what was at stake — and resulting anger and activism, pressure applied to state legislatures — led representatives to act.

Of course: vote.

Vote, as they say, as if your life depended on it, because it does, but more importantly: other people’s lives depend on it. And between voting, consider where to aim your anger in ways that will influence election outcomes: educate yourself about local races and policy proposals, as well as the history of the reproductive rights and reproductive-justice movements. Get engaged not just on a presidential level — please God, not just at a presidential level — but with the fights for state legislative power, in congressional and senate elections, all of which shape abortion policy and the judiciary, and the voting rights on which every other kind of freedom hinges. Knock doors, register voters, give to and volunteer with the organizations that are working to fight voter suppression and redistricting and expand the electorate; as well as to those recruiting and training progressive candidates, especially women and women of color, especially young and first-time candidates, to run for elected office.

You can also protest, go to rallies. Join a local political group where your rage will likely be shared with others.

Above all, do not let defeat or despair take you, and do not let anyone tell you that your anger is misplaced or silly or in vain, or that it is anything other than urgent and motivating. It may be terrifying — it is terrifying. But this — the fury and the fight it must fuel — is going to last the rest of our lives and we must get comfortable using our rage as central to the work ahead.

Email This Page

e-max.it: your social media marketing partner
 

Comments   

A note of caution regarding our comment sections:

For months a stream of media reports have warned of coordinated propaganda efforts targeting political websites based in the U.S., particularly in the run-up to the 2016 presidential election.

We too were alarmed at the patterns we were, and still are, seeing. It is clear that the provocateurs are far more savvy, disciplined, and purposeful than anything we have ever experienced before.

It is also clear that we still have elements of the same activity in our article discussion forums at this time.

We have hosted and encouraged reader expression since the turn of the century. The comments of our readers are the most vibrant, best-used interactive feature at Reader Supported News. Accordingly, we are strongly resistant to interrupting those services.

It is, however, important to note that in all likelihood hardened operatives are attempting to shape the dialog our community seeks to engage in.

Adapt and overcome.

Marc Ash
Founder, Reader Supported News

 
+22 # ChrisCurrie 2019-05-18 13:30
The GOP doesn't care about babies at all. They dishonestly claim to be "concerned about saving lives" regarding the abortion issue in order to please some phony "Evangelical Christian" religious leaders, but in order to please their wealthiest sponsors, they have REPEATEDLY voted to LITERALLY KILL hundreds of thousands of American men, women, children, babies, AND fetuses EACH YEAR by denying them healthcare!
 
 
+10 # 47scooter 2019-05-19 08:46
Indeed – as a bargaining chip in 2017, the Republican-cont rolled Congress failed to fund the Children’s Health Insurance Program past the September deadline, leaving millions of American children at risk of losing their health insurance. The U.S. Senate decided one way to offset the $1.5 trillion tax cut for corporations is to reduce funding for social programs such as Medicaid, Medicare, Social Security, veterans’ benefits.

Sister Joan Chittister is a member of the Benedictine Sisters of Erie, Pennsylvania:
“I do not believe that just because you’re opposed to abortion, that that makes you pro-life. In fact, I think in many cases, your morality is deeply lacking if all you want is a child born but not a child fed, not a child educated, not a child housed. And why would I think that you don’t? Because you don’t want any tax money to go there. That’s not pro-life. That’s pro-birth. We need a much broader conversation on what the morality of pro-life is.”

Let’s converse about the “bug splats” of Afghani children on the screens of drone operators; or the children who lose parents to Big Pharma opioids – annually, 20 times the number of people lost on 9/11. The bipartisan Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of how many Americans will die each year because of loss of health care coverage surpasses that number.
 
 
+7 # bardphile 2019-05-18 13:52
Elections matter; the whole country's a big tent, like it or not. If Clinton had been elected, we wouldn't have to have this conversation.
 
 
-10 # HenryS1 2019-05-18 14:57
1) I absolutely support the right to choose/Roe vs. Wade, etc.

2) I am appalled at the words, tactics, and successes of the opposition.

3) I view a blunt appeal to anger and rage as hurting cause #1

Certainly Trump has done well with channeling anger. But his appeals are calmly and carefully crafted.

To bystanders, seeing "rage" on the Left and solemn soothing words on the Right..... who would YOU pick? If you are a religious person who spends a weekly sanctimonious hour in church with your neighbors, who looks like the Christian, and who looks like they are possessed by the Devil?

So, I reject "do not let anyone tell you that your anger...is anything other than urgent and motivating".

Anger that replaces reason and less pleasurable but constructive action is another "opium for the masses". Justifiable police shooting and a hierarchy of other responses effortlessly neutralize/elim inate/incarcera te angry dissenters while appearing "reasonable" in the cover-up. Anger does not encourage sympathy or quality listening.

Anger IS reasonable, natural, and part of a healthy personality's repertoire of emotions. But following the "Terrible Twos" one learns that it does not always end well.

So, gather for catharsis over shared rage if that is your emotional need. Practice healthy anger, if you are inhibited about expressing it. But don't make it primary, or you aspire to be mob fodder, achieving someone else's ends.
 
 
+17 # ddd-rrr 2019-05-18 16:36
THANK YOU, REBECCA TRAISTER, for saying these TRUTHS,
and to The Cut and to RSN for publishing these!

This needed to be said about such an important issue as
a women's right to possess basic bodily autonomy,
and our government’s obligation to support
that right, rather than attempting
to dilute it.
 
 
+16 # dotlady 2019-05-18 18:17
Sanctimonious warnings about loosing the anger one feels seems like asking someone to be quiet while they're being raped. It's unladylike to show anger, right. Remember the Navajo story about the women who simply stopped servicing their men and lived separately. The men were unable to cope.The women did fine. But they all missed each other in some ways. They came to an agreement to get back together. Our agreement could be the availability of abortion when necessary.
 
 
+2 # DongiC 2019-05-19 00:56
The women who are really upset with the changing status of abortion can vent their anger by turning off sexually all males. They can do any and all the things that Rebecca Traister suggests in her fine article. But, the real neutron bomb in social relations would be to deny their partners any sexual favors. It would be especially effective against that group of charlatans who claim to speak for God and quote his position on abortion. If they speak for a deity, let them demonstrate it by performing the miracles that the Galilean carpenter did in His mission to Earth. I don't see people with terminal diseases like cancer rushing off to churches for cures. Or folks being raised from the dead like Lazurus or the woman whose daughter had died. So if you speak for God, prove it.

The time has come for women to gain full rights and control of their bodies is one of them. Send those male misogynists packing of either political party who for too long have controlled the engines of power. Use your anger, ladies, to fuel political drives at every political level and remember, VOTE! VOTE! VOTE!!
 
 
-2 # Texas Aggie 2019-05-19 18:57
I applaud the sentiments, but think what will happen if an entitled male gets cut off. There will be rage and beatings.
 
 
+4 # librarian1984 2019-05-19 02:45
I am also angry that the Democratic Party consistently forces corporate candidates down our throats, not just Hillary Clinton but Joe Biden and Cheri Bustos and Debbie Wasserman-Schul tz and countless others, including whoever they're putting in place to oust AOC, because you know they're working on it -- politicians who don't care one bit about the people or policies that will help them.

One out of five American children lives in poverty, but when do the DINOs talk about that? Or war, or climate change, or any of the important issues facing US?

Instead, the party -- supposedly OUR party -- enables GOP monstrosities, usually without a peep and often with their collusion. There is PLENTY to be angry about -- and if anger gets people off their couches, then I say it's about time.
 
 
+6 # Diane_Wilkinson_Trefethen_aka_tref 2019-05-20 12:19
I think the comments above are not really about anger; they are about semantics. Rebecca isn’t saying we should allow ourselves to be filled with white-hot anger, total and mind numbing. What she is saying is that for decades, women have been filled with eyes-wide-open rage at the INJUSTICES perpetrated upon us and told to keep quiet, calm, so as not to be thought of as hysterical. It isn’t blind anger she is advocating but the cold, steely anger of those who have been and are suffering and are, as the song goes, not going to take it anymore.

Stop and think through that stay calm advice. Have you EVER been really upset by a gross injustice, one that causes deaths and destruction? And did YOU decide that the wisest course was to sit down and keep quiet? And if you and your fellow travelers did make that decision, did your silence help rectify the injustice?

“Do not hide your light under a bushel.” “The squeaky wheel gets the oil.” “See something, SAY something.” Where in the world is the saying, “When you see a person committing unjust acts again and again, don’t show you are outraged. Keep your mouth shut!”?
 

THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community.

RSNRSN