home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: alt.feminism
- Path: sparky!uunet!utcsri!skule.ecf!torn!news.ccs.queensu.ca!venus!ed
- From: ed@scorpiocmc.ca (Ed Antosz)
- Subject: Re: Choice?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov18.170958.23370@venus.ic.cmc.ca>
- Keywords: abortion, pornography
- Sender: ed@scorpio (Ed Antosz)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: scorpio
- Reply-To: antosz@scorpio.ic.cmc.ca
- Organization: Canadian Microelectronics Corporation
- References: <jay.1.722047982@uuserv.cc.utah.edu>
- Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:09:58 GMT
- Lines: 22
-
- In article <jay.1.722047982@uuserv.cc.utah.edu>, jay@uuserv.cc.utah.edu (Jay Deuel) writes:
- |> As my first posting to this group, I would like to pose the following:
- |>
- |> Why do feminists consider a woman's right "to do with her body what
- |> she will" so basic when talking about abortion, yet so forien when the
- |> subject is pornography? How about prostitution, suicide, drugs, etc.?
-
- I think the argument is made that the social issues which make it important for
- women to have control over their bodies are the same ones which force women into
- prostitution (viz control over one's life, career, responsibility for self,
- access to equal wages/opportunity, etc). My understanding is that most of the
- women in the profession are not there of choice but rather of necessity.
- The same situation applies to pornography. There argument is that most of the
- women involved in the business are there because that is often the only
- lucrative(?) option available to them.
-
- Looking at your statement on the surface shows that the positions are
- contradictory. Stepping back one level and looking at the causes of both shows
- that perhaps the same argument applies to why women want control over their
- bodies and at the same time object to pornography etc.
-
- Ed
-