DOCSLIB.ORG

Interactive Framing Dynamics and Ideological Boundaries in the American Abortion Debate

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Interactive Framing Dynamics and Ideological Boundaries in the American Abortion Debate Interactive Framing Dynamics and Ideological Boundaries in the American Abortion Debate A Dissertation SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA BY Kia Heise IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Dr. Teresa Swartz, Dr. Lisa Park August 2015 © Kia Heise 2015 Table of Contents i. Introduction……………………………………………………………………..1 ii. Chapter 1 Social Movement Framing Theory…………………………………......................6 iii. Chapter 2 Pro-Life And Pro-Choice Framing And Counterframing Processes…………….20 iv. Chapter 3 Case #1: Abortion as Good Mothering: Claiming a “Moral Framework” for Abortion Rights ………………………………………………………………….56 a. Framing Abortion As Good Mothering…………………………………73 b. Testing the Boundaries of “Moral” Choices……………………………..88 v. Chapter 4 Case #2: Abortion as Black Genocide: Claiming Racism in the Pro-Life Movement………………………………………………………………………112 a. The Conflicting Racial Ideologies of the Black Pro-Life Leaders: Victimhood, Pathology, and Colorblindness…………………………...150 b. Narratives of Racial Authenticity and Betrayal in the Abortion as ‘Black Genocide’ Debate……………………………………………………….184 vi. Conclusion: The Risks of Blurred Boundaries: Exploiting Weakness, Filling the Gaps, Using the Language of the Opposition...………………………………...219 vii. Bibliography…………...………………………………………………………224 viii. Appendices...…………………………………………………………………..234 i Introduction While the ideologies of the pro-life and pro-choice movements are seemingly diametrically opposed, their framing strategies over time are deeply interconnected, resulting in a blurring of ideological boundaries between the movements. Since the legalization of abortion in 1973, the pro-life and pro-choice movements have been constantly engaged in a process of framing and counterframing, with each movement gaining political advantages at different times in the last 40 years (Rohlinger 2006, McCaffrey and Keys 2000, Esacove 2004). Successful counterframing forces a social movement to reframe or clarify their argument, and in this interaction, the pro-life and pro-choice movements have, at times, borrowed from and co-opted the language of the opposing movement, which can be advantageous or hazardous to a movement’s success (Benford and Snow 2000). In this dissertation, I illustrate the interactive nature of strategic framing processes of the American pro-life and pro-choice movements and the process whereby movements borrow and co-opt language and imagery from opposing movements. Illustrated by two case studies of reactive and strategic counterframing in the pro-choice and pro-life movements, I show how such framing complicates the boundaries between these movements’ ideologies. What was once demarcated as progressive becomes a champion of conservative causes and vice versa. I extend social movement theories of interactive framing processes and boundary demarcation by contributing an analysis of instances 1 where activists blur ideological boundaries between movements and risk weakening the collective identification of movement adherents. I have identified two “cases” that exemplify this interactive framing process and the subsequent blurring of ideological boundaries between the pro-life and pro-choice movements—1) pro-choice activists framing abortion as “good mothering” and 2) pro- life activists framing abortion as “Black genocide.” First, I explore the historical and cultural context of each framing strategy, as well as the motivations and goals of the movement actors utilizing them. Then, in the case of framing abortion as “good mothering,” I explore how pro-choice movement activists attempt to respond to countermovement attacks by reframing abortion using the language of “good mothers” and “morality” traditionally used by the politically conservative pro-life movement. In the case of framing abortion as “Black genocide,” I explore how pro-life movement activists attempt reframe abortion using the language of racism and inequality traditionally associated with politically liberal civil rights activists. I argue that as each movement responds to countermovement threats by borrowing and co-opting language and imagery from the opposing movement, the ideological boundaries between the pro- life and pro-choice movements are blurred. Blurred boundaries threaten the stability of each movement by weakening collective identity ties and risk marginalizing and alienating certain movement adherents 2 In PART ONE of this dissertation, I argue that the framing of abortion as “good mothering” is a response to the success of the pro-life rhetoric that frames women who abort as bad mothers. This case study illustrates the interconnected nature of framing and counterframing processes. By attempting to frame women who abort as good mothers making moral choices, the pro-choice actors utilize the culturally resonant values of good motherhood and child-centered choices that have been central to pro-life framing over the years (Snow and Benford 1988). In this way, they hope to destigmatize abortion and abortion patients using language of the pro-life movement and expand the boundaries of “morality” to include abortion. This framing tactically avoids the “choice” and personal autonomy frameworks of the mainstream pro-choice movement, which have been consistently attacked and weakened since their emergence after Roe v. Wade. The pro- choice advocates using this framework hope to mobilize support for abortion rights from that segment of potential adherents who are uncomfortable with viewing abortion as simply a woman’s personal choice or legal right. However, their framing abortion as moral and women who chose abortion as responsible marginalizes the many women who fall outside of the realm of “good mothers” making “responsible choices” for their children. In my analysis, I show that, while framing abortion as good mothering acknowledges women’s emotional connections to their fetuses and responds to a feminist call for destigmatizing abortion through a “moral framework,” it may also pose a significant risk to the larger movement. This case study contributes to our understanding of the framing/counterframing process by exploring the risks of responding to countermovement attacks “on their terms” (Benford and Snow 2000). While such 3 reframing provides an opportunity to mobilize new supporters, it may be just as likely to alienate core constituents (Ferree 2003). Because movement activists under attack are seeking to restore their movement’s moral status, they are likely to reframe their movement using culturally resonant language of the successful countermovement. In doing so, they may contradict or challenge their movement’s core ideologies and divide the movement. I draw on theories of boundary framing and collective identity to show how this interactive and reactive framing blurs the ideological boundaries between the pro-choice and pro-life movements. In PART TWO of this dissertation, I argue that the re-emergence of “abortion as Black genocide” framing in the anti-abortion movement should be understood as a response to the rise of the reproductive justice movement led by women of color that criticizes the pro-choice movement for ignoring racism within its ranks. This case study also illustrates the interconnected nature of the framing and counterframing processes in the abortion debate. By framing abortion as “Black genocide” these pro-life movement activists are attempting to mobilize greater support among African Americans and utilize the increased focus on race in the abortion debate to their advantage. They claim that Black Americans are specifically targeted for extinction by the government and Planned Parenthood. These activists, many of whom are African Americans, draw on the history of racially discriminatory population control programs and the relatively high rate of abortion in the Black community today to argue that abortion is a continuation of racist eugenic practices stretching back to slavery in the United States. In their degree of credibility and salience to African Americans, this frame is hypothetically likely to 4 appeal to the targets of mobilization. However, I argue this proposed frame extension deeply conflicts with the racial ideologies of conservative Republicans—the pro-life movement’s core constituents—in its focus on race and racism. In order for a frame to have resonance, it must be credible, and credibility depends on three factors: frame consistency, empirical credibility, and credibility of the frame articulators or claimsmakers (Benford and Snow 2000). I suggest that the ‘Black genocide’ frames lacks consistency as well as credibility with both conservative Republicans and Black civil rights leaders. This research contributes to our understanding of the framing/counterframing process by exploring the risks of frame extensions that tactically utilize the language of the opposition and risk blurring the boundaries between the opposing movements and alienating certain key constituents. These cases illustrate the difficulty of boundary demarcation when language, imagery, and framing that were once associated with the pro-life movement become associated with the pro-choice movement and vice versa. Thus, interactive counterframing confuses and shifts boundaries. In this research, I extend social movement theories of interactive framing and boundary demarcation processes by contributing an analysis of instances where activists blur ideological boundaries between movements—in an attempt to weaken their opponents’ claims on certain
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Legal Response to Propaganda Broadcasts Related to Crisis in and Around Ukraine, 2014–2015
    International Journal of Communication 9(2015), Feature 3125–3145 1932–8036/2015FEA0002 Legal Response to Propaganda Broadcasts Related to Crisis in and Around Ukraine, 2014–2015 ANDREI G. RICHTER1 Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Keywords: freedom of expression, freedom of the media, propaganda for war, incitement to hatred, international standards, rule of law, national regulators, Russia, Ukraine, UK, Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova The conflict in and around Ukraine in 2014–2015 has brought about the spread of propaganda for war and hatred, especially on television and on the Internet. Research on the national laws and resolutions made by courts and independent media regulators that adjudicated complaints on Russian TV propaganda in Latvia, Lithuania, Moldova, the UK, and Ukraine shows that the national courts and regulators made few references to international norms, resting, rather, on domestically developed standards. As a result, there was a lack of solid grounds for stopping, blocking, and banning programs emanating from Russian media. In particular, there was no clear line between propaganda for war and hatred, proscribed under international norms, and legally protected Kremlin interpretation of the events in Ukraine. The comparative analysis of case law attempts to provide a modern rationale for regulation of propaganda for war and hatred and through it to offer relevant recommendations. Introduction The year 2014 marked the 100th anniversary of the beginning of World War I. It is worthwhile to recall that the Austro-Hungarian ultimatum to Serbia, which precipitated the start of the hostilities, included a major demand to stop nationalistic propaganda, as it flared the existing controversies.
    [Show full text]
  • Conceptualising Historical Crimes
    Should crimes committed in the course of Conceptualising history that are comparable to genocide, crimes against humanity or war crimes be Historical Crimes referred to as such, whatever the label used at the time?180 This is the question I want to examine below. Let us compare the prob- lems of labelling historical crimes with his- torical and recent concepts, respectively.181 Historical concepts for historical crimes “Historical concepts” are terms used to de- scribe practices by the contemporaries of these practices. Scholars can defend the use of historical concepts with the argu- ment that many practices deemed inadmis- sible today (such as slavery, human sacri- fice, heritage destruction, racism, censor- ship, etc.) were accepted as rather normal and sometimes even as morally and legally right in some periods of the past. Arguably, then, it would be unfaithful to the sources, misleading and even anachronistic to use Antoon De Baets the present, accusatory labels to describe University of Groningen them. This would mean, for example, that one should not call the crimes committed during the Crusades crimes against hu- manity (even if a present observer would have good reason to qualify some of these crimes as such), for such a concept was nonexistent at the time. A radical variant of the latter is the view that not only recent la- bels should be avoided but even any moral judgments of past crimes. This argument, however, can be coun- tered with several objections. First, diverg- ing judgments. It is well known that parties V HISTOREIN OLU M E 11 (2011) involved in violent conflicts label these conflicts differently.
    [Show full text]
  • Dsjfeb08.Pdf
    feb. 2008>>>www.dogstreetjournal.com>>>volume 5 issue 6 The DoG Street Journal (what’sinside) (whoweare) Road to Richmond EDITORIALSTAFF Rebecca Hamfeldt >Lobbying the Legislature The DSJ reviews students’ recent trip to Co-Editor in Chief the State legislature to lobby for the Jeri Kent College. Co-Editor in Chief page 5 Stacey Marin Executive Editor In the Know Jonna Knappenberger News Editor >Students and the News Just how informed are students at the Jake Robert Nelson College? The DSJ takes a look at our Interim News Editor generation and the news. Gretchen Hannes page 14 Style Editor John Hill Mrs. President Sports Editor >The White House’s Future Katie Photiadis With presidential primaries in full Opinions Editor swing, one DSJ columnist predicts the Megan Luteran outcome of the 2008 election. Print Photo Editor page 16 Nazrin Roberson Online Photo Editor More than a T-Shirt Ryan Powers >Intramural Sports Online Design Editor Find out what’s behind competing for Michael Duarte the coveted championship t-shirt. Online Design Editor page 18 Keeley Edmonds Business Manager Khaleelah Jones Operations Editor OURMISSION Kellie O’Malley OURMISSION COVERIMAGE Layout Assistant The DSJ is the College’s only For the first time in seasons, Tribe (talktous) monthly newsmagazine and daily men’s basketball is tearing it up The DoG Street Journal online paper. Access us anytime on on the court. There have been The College of William & Mary the web at dogstreetjournal.com. several energy-charged games, Campus Center Basement We strive to provide a quality, including six straight wins and a Office 12B reliable and thought-provoking tough loss against ODU at the media outlet serving the College most well-attended home game (visitus) community with constantly in over a decade.
    [Show full text]
  • The Public Eye, Summer 2010
    Right-Wing Co-Opts Civil Rights Movement History, p. 3 TheA PUBLICATION OF POLITICAL R PublicEyeESEARCH ASSOCIATES Summer 2010 • Volume XXV, No.2 Basta Dobbs! Last year, a coalition of Latino/a groups suc - cessfully fought to remove anti-immigrant pundit Lou Dobbs from CNN. Political Research Associates Executive DirectorTarso Luís Ramos spoke to Presente.org co-founder Roberto Lovato to find out how they did it. Tarso Luís Ramos: Tell me about your organization, Presente.org. Roberto Lovato: Presente.org, founded in MaY 2009, is the preeminent online Latino adVocacY organiZation. It’s kind of like a MoVeOn.org for Latinos: its goal is to build Latino poWer through online and offline organiZing. Presente started With a campaign to persuade GoVernor EdWard Rendell of PennsYlVania to take a stand against the Verdict in the case of Luis RamíreZ, an undocumented immigrant t t e Who Was killed in Shenandoah, PennsYl - k n u l Vania, and Whose assailants Were acquitted P k c a J bY an all-White jurY. We also ran a campaign / o t o to support the nomination of Sonia h P P SotomaYor to the Supreme Court—We A Students rally at a State Board of Education meeting, Austin, Texas, March 10, 2010 produced an “I Stand With SotomaYor” logo and poster that people could displaY at Work or in their neighborhoods and post on their Facebook pages—and a feW addi - From Schoolhouse to Statehouse tional, smaller campaigns, but reallY the Curriculum from a Christian Nationalist Worldview Basta Dobbs! continues on page 12 By Rachel Tabachnick TheTexas Curriculum IN THIS ISSUE Controversy objectiVe is present—a Christian land goV - 1 Editorial .
    [Show full text]
  • Genocide and Belonging: Processes of Imagining Communities
    GENOCIDE AND BELONGING: PROCESSES OF IMAGINING COMMUNITIES ADENO ADDIS* ABSTRACT Genocide is often referred to as “the crime of crimes.” It is a crime that is very high on the nastiness scale. The purpose of the genocidaire is of course to destroy a community—a community that he regards as a threat to his own community, whether the threat is perceived as physical, economic or cultural. The way this takes place and the complicity of law in this process has been extensively explored by scholars. But the process of destroying a community is perversely often simultaneously an “exercise in community build- ing,” a process through which intra-communal bonds and belong- ing are sought to be strengthened. This aspect of genocide has been entirely neglected by scholars, especially the role of law in that pro- cess. This article makes and defends two claims about communities and belonging in relation to genocide. First, it argues that as per- verse as it sounds, genocide is in fact an exercise in community building and law is highly implicated in that process. It defends the thesis with arguments that are conceptual as well as empirical. The second, and more hopeful, claim is that the international response * W. R. Irby Chair and W. Ray Forrester Professor of Public and Constitutional Law, Tulane University School of Law. Previous drafts of the paper were presented at an international conference at the Guanghua Law School of Zhejiang University (China) and at Tulane Law School faculty symposium. I thank participants at those meetings for the many helpful questions and comments.
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Alveda C. King
    Dr. Alveda C. King PASTORAL ASSOCIATE, PRIESTS FOR LIFE DR. ALVEDA C. KING works toward her purpose in life, to glorify God. Dr. King currently serves as a Pastoral Associate and Director of African-American Outreach for Priests for Life and Gospel of Life Ministries. She is also a voice for the Silent No More Awareness Campaign, sharing her testimony of two abortions, God’s forgiveness, and healing. The daughter of the late civil rights activist Rev. A.D. King and his wife Naomi Barber King, Alveda grew up in the civil rights movement led by her uncle, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Her family home in Birmingham, Alabama, was bombed, as was her father’s church office in Louisville, Kentucky. Alveda was jailed during the open housing movement. She sees the pro- life movement as a continuation of the civil rights struggle. Dr. King is a former college professor and served in the Georgia State House of Representatives. She is a best selling author; among her books are How Can the Dream Survive if we Murder the Children? and I Don’t Want Your Man, I Want My Own. She is an accomplished actress and songwriter. The Founder of King for America, Inc., Alveda is also the recipient of a Doctorate of Laws degree from Saint Anselm College. Dr. King lives in Atlanta, where she is the grateful mother of six and a doting grandmother. To arrange a media interview, email [email protected] or call Margaret at 888-735-3448, ext. 251 To invite Alveda King to speak in your area, contact our Speakers Bureau at 888-PFL-3448, ext.
    [Show full text]
  • Start Debating Stop Hating
    The surest sign one is losing a debate is to resort to character with the Tea Party movement. Some on the Left have even impugned the assassination. The Southern Poverty Law Center, a liberal fundraising Manhattan Declaration - which upholds the sanctity of life, the value of machine whose tactics have been condemned by observers across the traditional marriage and the fundamental right of religious freedom - as an political spectrum, is doing just that. anti-gay document and have forced its removal from general communications networks. The group, which was once known for combating racial bigotry, is now attacking several groups that uphold Judeo-Christian moral views, including This is intolerance pure and simple. Elements of the radical Left are trying marriage as the union of a man and a woman. to shut down informed discussion of policy issues that are being considered by Congress, legislatures, and the courts. How does the SPLC attack? By labeling its opponents “hate groups.” No discussion. No consideration of the issues. No engagement. No debate! Tell the radical Left it is time to stop spreading hateful rhetoric attacking individuals and organizations merely for expressing ideas with which they These types of slanderous tactics have been used against voters who signed disagree. Our debates can and must remain civil - but they must never be petitions and voted for marriage amendments in all thirty states that have suppressed through personal assaults that aim only to malign an opponent’s considered them, as well as against the millions of Americans who identify character. START DEBATING STOP HATING You can take action by adding your name to the following statement: We, the undersigned, stand in solidarity with Family Research Council, American Family Association, Concerned Women of America, National Organization for Marriage, Liberty Counsel and other pro-family organizations that are working to protect and promote natural marriage and family.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Genocide Studies
    Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal Volume 7 Issue 1 Article 1 April 2012 Full Issue 7.1 Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/gsp Recommended Citation (2012) "Full Issue 7.1," Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal: Vol. 7: Iss. 1: Article 1. Available at: https://scholarcommons.usf.edu/gsp/vol7/iss1/1 This Front Matter is brought to you for free and open access by the Open Access Journals at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Genocide Studies and Prevention: An International Journal by an authorized editor of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Editors’ Introduction Volume 7, issue 1 of Genocide Studies and Prevention continues the discussion of the state of the field of genocide studies that was initiated in volume 6, issue 3. Due to our (the editors’) keen desire to include as many different voices and perspectives as possi- ble, we reached out to old hands in the field, younger but well established scholars, and several scholars who recently completed their graduate studies but have already made an impact on the field. The sequence of the articles over the two issues began with comprehensive treat- ments and then moved into articles with more specific focuses, grouped thematically where applicable. Through the entire sequence across these two issues of GSP, we hope that readers will gain a solid sense of the history of the field and insight into some of the perdurable issues that have been at the heart of the field since its inception and that they have opportunities to reflect on the host of issues and concerns raised by authors coming from different disciplines (e.g., history, political science, sociology, psychology, philosophy) with vastly different perspectives.
    [Show full text]
  • Brown Jesus Today?
    THE ANOINTED SAVIOR JESUS CHRIST together with all other “pre-70 AD” Semites, Hebrews, Israelites and Jews (and Egyptians and Ethiopians) HAD DARK-BROWN SKIN & CLASSICALLY AFRICAN COMPLEXION c © 2015 by John M Guire: Free Radical Informant: [email protected] Nobody cares about Africa. —GEN. ZATEB KAZIM, SAHARA My sources: - The Christian Bible (King James Version): o Ancient Israelites’ self-observation: . Leviticus 13:30: “Then the priest shall see the plague: and, behold, if it be in sight deeper than the skin; and there be in it a yellow thin hair; then the priest shall pronounce him unclean: it is a dry scall, even a leprosy upon the head or beard.” Blond hair for true Israelites was a symptom of plague, yet Jesus was never suspected of being unclean in that way. Job 30:27-31: “My bowels boiled, and rested not: the days of affliction prevented me. I went mourning without the sun: I stood up, and I cried in the congregation. I am a brother to dragons, and a companion to owls. My skin is black upon me, and my bones are burned with heat. My harp also is turned to mourning, and my organ into the voice of them that weep.” . Song of Solomon 1:5: The speaker whom we assume to be the beloved (feminine) says, “I am black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jerusalem, as the tents of Kedar, as the curtains of Solomon.” The beloved carries on in a way that demonstrates insecurity about her color, accentuated by her misfortunes and hard labor.
    [Show full text]
  • PP No 2021/0136
    PP 2021/0136 SOCIAL AFFAIRS POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEEE SECOND REPORT FOR THE SESSION 2020-21 The implementation of the Abortion Reform Act 2019 SOCIAL AFFAIRS POLICY REVIEW COMMITTEE SECOND REPORT FOR THE SESSION 2021-22 THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ABORTION REFORM ACT 2019 There shall be three Policy Review Committees which shall be Standing Committees of the Court. Subject to Standing Order 5.6(3) they may scrutinise the established (but not emergent) policies, as deemed necessary by each Committee, of the Departments and Offices indicated in this paragraph together with the associated Statutory Boards and other bodies: Social Affairs Committee: Department of Health and Social Care; Department of Education, Sport and Culture; and Department of Home Affairs. Each Policy Review Committee shall in addition be entitled to take evidence from witnesses, whether representing a Department, Office, Statutory Board or other organisation within its remit or not, in cases where the subject matter cuts across different areas of responsibility of different Departments, Offices, Statutory Boards or other organisations. The Policy Review Committees may also hold joint sittings for deliberative purposes or to take evidence. The Chairmen of the Policy Review Committees shall agree on the scope of a Policy Review Committee’s inquiry where the subject cuts across the respective boundaries of the Policy Review Committees’ remits. Each Policy Review Committee shall have: (a) a Chairman elected by Tynwald, (b) two other Members. Members of Tynwald shall not be eligible for membership of the Committee, if, for the time being, they hold any of the following offices: President of Tynwald, member of the Council of Ministers, member of the Treasury Department referred to in section 1(2)(b) of the Government Departments Act 1987.
    [Show full text]
  • Thank You President Trump
    Thank You President Trump conservativeactionproject.com/thank-you-president-trump/ January 13, 2020 January 13, 2020 Washington, DC Dear President Trump, On behalf of the conservative movement, we would like to thank you for the accomplishments your administration has achieved on behalf of the American people. From a booming economy, to stronger protections at the border, to implementing strong protections for the unborn, to nominating constitutionalist judges to the federal bench, you have kept your promises to the voters that elected you. Specifically, we want to applaud you for the following achievements: A booming economy that has unemployment at its lowest level in fifty years, the highest median household income on record, a labor force that has grown by 2.1 million. 1/11 Poverty rates for African Americans, Asian Americans, and Hispanic Americans at record lows, and unemployment among women is at its lowest level in nearly 70 years. Aggressively working to address the opioid crisis. Signing the Tax Cuts & Jobs Act of 2017 which resulted in more than 6 million American works receiving wage increases, bonuses, and increased benefits. Rolling back nearly 8 regulations for every significant new one and cutting regulatory costs by more than $50 billion. Repealing two particularly onerous regulations: the Obama-era Waters of the U.S. rule, and the Obama-era “Clean Power” Plan, and revoking California’s emissions waiver, all of which cost Americans millions of dollars and thousands of jobs. Withdrawing America from the Paris climate treaty, which saved American families $20,000 a year. Opening up federal lands and offshore areas to fossil fuel development and permitting the pipelines and infrastructure necessary to facilitate further development.
    [Show full text]
  • Is Abortionabortion “Black“Black Genocide”Genocide”
    SISTERSONG WOMEN OF COLOR REPRODUCTIVE JUSTICE COLLECTIVE C o l l e c t i v eVo i c e s VO L U M E 6 ISSUE 12 S u m m e r 2 0 1 1 IsIs AbortionAbortion “Black“Black Genocide”Genocide” AlliesAllies DefendingDefending BlackBlack WomenWomen UnshacklingUnshackling BlackBlack MotherhoodMotherhood ReproductiveReproductive VViolenceiolence aandnd BlackBlack WomenWomen WhyWhy II PrProvideovide AborAbortions:tions: AlchemAlchemyy ofof RaceRace,, Gender,Gender, andand HumanHuman RightsRights COLLECTIVEVOICES “The real power, as you and I well know, is collective. I can’t afford to be afraid of you, nor of me. If it takes head-on collisions, let’s do it. This polite timidity is killing us.” -Cherrie Moraga Publisher....................................................SisterSong Editor in Chief.........................................Loretta Ross Managing Editor.......................................Serena Garcia Creative Director....................................cscommunications Webmaster..............................................Dionne Turner CONTRIBUTING WRITERS Loretta Ross Laura Jimenez Heidi Williamson Dionne Turner Serena Garcia Charity Woods Monica Simpson Candace Cabbil Kathryn Joyce Willie J. Parker, MD, MPH, MSc Bani Hines Hudson Gina Brown Susan A. Cohen Laura L. Lovett Cherisse Scott From the Managing Editor, Serena Garcia: Please note in this issue of Collective Voices we have allowed our writers to maintain their own editorial integrity in how they use the terms, “Black”,“minority,” and the capitalization of Reproductive Justice. Send Inquiries to: [email protected] SEND STORY IDEAS TO: [email protected] SisterSong Women of Color Reproductive Justice Collective 1237 Ralph David Abernathy Blvd., SW Atlanta, GA 3011 404-756-2680 www.sistersong.net © All Rights Reserved 2 www.sistersong.net CV Message from the National Coordinator This special edition of Collective Voices is dedicated to women of color fighting race- and gender-specific anti-abortion legislation and billboards across the country.
    [Show full text]