Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

does the media finally get that anti-choice is about more than abortion?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Women's Rights Donate to DU
 
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 09:52 AM
Original message
does the media finally get that anti-choice is about more than abortion?
Does the Media Finally Get That Anti-Choice Is About Far More Than Abortion?
by Amanda Marcotte

The mainstream media has always, shall we say, struggled to understand that the anti-choice movement is anti-contraception, anti-STD prevention, and anti-sex education. It just doesn’t fit the official narrative, which posits that anti-choicers are somehow “pro-life,” people who are deeply invested in fetal life, but who, for some mysterious reason, mostly don’t extend their concern for life into opposition to war or support for life-saving health insurance reform. Even in explicitly pro-choice media outlets, the narrative tends to be about abortion, without little acknowledgment that attacks on contraception are part of the larger agenda of the anti-choice movement, even as news stories about abstinence-only and conscience clauses keep trickling out.

planned parenthood supporters

This was by anti-choice design. Anti-choicers realize that if they make their arguments about sex and female liberation, and especially if they attack contraception overtly, they lose. Contraception is just too mainstream and too popular, and 95 percent of Americans have premarital sex, making the anti-choice view (roughly, strictly controlled sex within heterosexual marriage should be the only legally sanctioned sex) a form of crankery that surpasses even theories that the moon landing was faked or that 9/11 was an inside job. But by fronting on fetuses, anti-choicers get taken seriously in the mainstream media, and have been able to get to a point where they basically control the conservative movement. And lately, with victories on both state and federal levels, they’ve been feeling invincible. Which led where hubris often does, to overplaying your hand and exposing your true self to the public.

The House using the continuing resolution as an opportunity to defund Planned Parenthood is a classic example of overreach that exposes someone’s true motivations. The cuts to Planned Parenthood are an attack strictly on contraception, cancer and STD screening, and other non-abortion services. But it was clear that anti-choice Republicans thought they could still play the game of calling everything they don’t like “abortion,” and figuring they could get away with it. Even though the cuts had nothing to do with abortion, supporters of the cuts kept yammering on about abortion in the hopes that people wouldn’t notice that they were giving a big kiss to the radical and tiny minority of Americans that oppose contraception.

It’s not working this time. Even though most media organizations are still filing this one under "abortion," the actual content of the reports focused on the fact that this was about contraception. The Twitter hashtag #thanksPPFA lit up again with women and men sharing stories of getting contraception, cancer screening (and treatment), and general health care from Planned Parenthood. Bloggers spoke out about their experiences. Hiding our heads in the sand and pretending this was about “life” was no longer an option when the policy was a direct assault on access to contraception for millions of people, a move that will hurt men and children, but is clearly at its heart a war on women.

. . . . .

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/02/22-1
Refresh | +3 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-22-11 10:03 AM
Response to Original message
1. There has been journalism in the MSM for a long time. There is no independence between the
news reporting aspect and their corporate controllers

They have effectively become entertainment tonight. They do NOT want to inform.

From WMDs, to the outrageous mis-reporting of the pseudo death of Representative Gifford, they have no shame.

So your assumption about in depth reporting on a subject, in this case, the right to privacy, not only has to do with the issues you rightly name, but also affects anyone, from confidentiality between a lawyer or a doctor's confidentiality between a client or patient, to basic civil rights

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 01:47 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Women's Rights Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC