The opinions expressed herein are those of the author, and not necessarily those of The New Agenda. This article has been cross-posted.
Ann Gordon, editor of The Selected Papers of Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, and Lynn Sherr, the noted biographer of Susan B. Anthony, have co-penned an article lambasting Sarah Palin for her speech before the Susan B. Anthony List, a prominent pro-life group. The gist of their article is hard to discern, as it really does come across as a disorganized diatribe against Palin for no other reason than Palin’s name appeared in print next to Anthony’s.
Gordon and Sherr do attempt to make a cogent argument about the accuracy of historical scholarship, but they are unable to hold themselves to that same standard. They claim in the article that no one knows if Susan B. Anthony was pro-life and that, at any rate, she didn’t think the subject belonged in politics. They also claim there is no evidence from Anthony herself that she was pro-life, and provide contradictory evidence to that claim by citing a letter which clearly suggests Anthony had moral qualms about a terminated pregnancy she knew about. Gordon and Sherr make no mention of the fact that Anthony’s newspaper, The Revolution, clearly articulated anti-abortion or pro-life views on a regular basis.
But Gordon and Sherr should know that Anthony and Stanton both made the political argument that the existence of abortion was the natural result of what they called “degradation of women.” They believed that sexual victimization of women led to the degradation, and that education was the answer. Educate women, give them opportunity, and abortions and out-of-wedlock births would fall. This was one of many rhetorical arguments used by the early women’s rights movement, many of which would not fit our worldview of what it means to fight for justice for women today.
Most early feminists were indeed pro-life, though not in the way that we understand the term today. Abortion at the time, often referred to as “infanticide” or “child murder,” was not what we think of today either, nor was human sexuality. Above all, religion held a different influence on people. Most of the participants in the early women’s rights movement had a tortured relationship with religion, on the one hand attributing much of women’s subjectivity to religious activity, but also being avowed believers (Stanton was so unwilling to give up on God that she created a Woman’s Bible).
Personally I think analogies between the abortion politics of the 19th century and today are unproductive in the same way letting the issue of abortion divide women today is unproductive. These were two very different worlds with two sets of laws and two sets of moral values. They are ultimately incomparable. Early feminists like Anthony would hardly recognize the debate that is being held today.
My biggest issue over the outbreak of this argument, however, is the short-sightedness of women like Gordon and Sherr, who purport to support progress for women, and yet attack one of the biggest symbols of that progress simply because their belief in left-feminism allows them to dictate who can and cannot be a feminist. The breakfast Palin spoke at has been covered by the media ad nasueum, and this new debate only serves to titillate the media pundits who thrive on this kind of thing. This is a function of our fractured politics.
Amidst all of this hoopla, some important questions aren’t being asked. For example, why is the right creating its own brand of feminism? Is it because left-feminism is so unwelcoming of and paranoid about women on the right? Could the emergence of feminism on the right eventually lead to a unified effort in the long run? What issues can a unified effort focus on? These are questions that may lead in a productive direction, but they aren’t even being considered because we are so hopelessly partisan. Conservative women are daring for the first time to use that savaged term “feminism,” and the left-feminist response is to express outrage because they share an American hero. Shouldn’t Susan B. Anthony belong to all Americans?
The proper response here is not to nitpick over some cherry-picked quotes (something left-feminist women do all the time) used by the group, or to project the blame for that cherry-picking onto the woman who was chosen to speak before that group. The proper response here is simple: Conservative women are discussing themselves as feminist. What a WIN!
And this is exactly my problem with partisan feminism. Left-feminism is so caught up in preserving itself as a brand for the Democratic Party that it can’t see, or support, progress as it happens right in front of them. This sets the worst example for those newly minted feminists on the right, who have, perhaps, only started their own partisan version of feminism because they have been shunned and rejected by short-sighted feminists on the left. It’s worth noting that Gordon and Sherr have both made significant contributions to the modern women’s rights movement, and that should not be forgotten. But it’s a shame they have allowed partisanship to trump what they know are the righteous goals of equality and opportunity for all women. And it’s a lost opportunity for us all when we breed partisan division among women and groups who could otherwise work together and achieve progress for all women.
Thank you, Anna Belle.
“The proper response here is simple: Conservative women are discussing themselves as feminist. What a WIN!”
Hallelujah! It’s a shame that we still have so many women on the left that are troubled by this. Far too many seem to believe that feminism is about tearing down other women because they don’t share the exact same politics as you. One thing we do know about Susan B was her commitment to unity, to strength in numbers, regardless of politics or religion. That is peppered all through her writings.
Did she not say these things too??
“What you should say to outsiders is that a Christian has neither more nor less rights in our Association than an atheist. When our platform becomes too narrow for people of all creeds and of no creeds, I myself shall not stand upon it.”
“I tell them I have worked 40 years to make the W.S. platform broad enough for Atheists and Agnostics to stand upon, and now if need be I will fight the next 40 to keep it Catholic enough to permit the straightest Orthodox religionist to speak or pray and count her beads upon.”
Anna Belle – I love what you wrote!
Why can’t we celebrate that women care about women’s issues! Isn’t that a victory for all women? It really does feel high school cliquey! We need to finally find common ground and work together!!!
Anna Belle,
Brava! Inviting all women to the party is the best way to get the most important present – Parity.
Annabelle,
I’m probably fiscally centrist and far left on social issues. Is there a place in feminism for me? Some feminists, because I am fiscally centrist, would not have me.
So thank you. I LOVE THIS PIECE!!!
And as a lefty on social issues I’d like to call out the left to acknowledge that conservative women have done and are doing some of the tougher work in calling out the sexual classification of women and girls. Many conservative groups have called out Hollywood for their rampant abuse of women while far too many on the left stay silent.
We must work together, we must operate under the big tent. We can (respectfully) duke it out on the other issues outside of the tent but if we can’t all gather under the same tent for some of the most base issues that affect women – well that is IMHO a net loss.
This is an excellent piece. I too am on the left, but I’ve believed for years that women need to unite — regardless of where they fall on the political spectrum, and regardless of race, class, religion, sexual orientation etc. — because at the end of the day, sexism knows no boundaries. I do feel that feminists on the left need to join this effort for common ground, but then, I also feel the same way about conservative women. We are still operating to a large extent in our comfortable clubs. We need to join together over our shared purpose and learn how to live with our differences while still actively supporting each other. I think The New Agenda is doing a good job of bridging these divides.
Needless to say, we need a new way to come at sexism, because it never rests. Just keeps getting worse. Meanwhile, the left-feminism groups of the past have done nothing in the past 25 years to make any kind of difference.
Thanks for the many constructive comments. I’m pleased this piece is speaking to women. Yttk, thank you for those quotes from SBA, because you are right on about that. From Mott to Stanton & Anthony to Alice Paul, the early feminists shared a single vision of unity for all women. It’s a shame we have lost that focus.
They believed that sexual victimization of women led to the degradation, and that education was the answer. Educate women, give them opportunity, and abortions and out-of-wedlock births would fall.
Well, it sure fits THIS pro-choice woman’s worldview.
Women on both sides of the fence nitpick women’s “issues” and women’s “concerns” and keep mouthing about how we support “women-positive legislation” and “women-friendly yadda yadda” and a million other tangled knots of avoidance-based wordplay, all to avoid SUPPORTING WOMEN THEMSELVES. I don’t know if right-wing feminists will be any different about that than left-wing ones were. Women will not support women — they will turn themselves into rhetorical and logical knots to avoid simply supporting another woman. That’s why there’s all this blah-blah about supporting women’s issues and women’s concerns and women’s thises and thats, but nothing about just SUPPORTING WOMEN. Point-blank. No more verbal jerrymandering. That’s the one step no woman, right or left wing, will EVER take.
Great article Anna Belle, Thank you.
I think at first liberal women had killer cognitive dissonance regarding Sarah Palin because in their black and white view of the world ONLY Democrats could make political gains for women. Now it is to the point where there are really only two options, Every hysterical sexist mantra that the Democrats and media have been chanting about Sarah Palin is true and they are going to prove it or liberal feminists were politically simple minded/can’t think for themselves and were used and duped by the Democrats who told Hillary their leading Presidential candidate to sit down and shut up and slandered Palin. At this point if they admit to what was and is being done to Sarah the Cunt they fear looking stupid. What they don’t realize is it is too late, they already look like simpletons and the Democrat party and media look profoundly and blatantly misogynist.
Also, I do not want to be part of an org that focuses on fringe but outrageous problems. For me the only goals of feminism that I feel are worth my time are…images of women and girls in media/no real female voice in media, equal pay for equal work and parity in government representation. Which as I see it, is what the conservative women are focusing on.
Despair not AB.
We’ve regained the vision of unity…
It’s right here at The New Agenda and you are a part of the solution!!!
Absolutely, Amy. That’s why I’m here. No one does what TNA does, but they will. And we will lead the way!
Also, I do not want to be part of an org that focuses on fringe but outrageous problems. For me the only goals of feminism that I feel are worth my time are…images of women and girls in media/no real female voice in media, equal pay for equal work and parity in government representation. Which as I see it, is what the conservative women are focusing on.
That’s it, Bes! That’s pretty much how I feel. Maybe the second wave fractured because it didn’t have an organized gameplan, but we know enough today to create one. I couldn’t agree more with what you say about image awareness, equal pay, and parity. that’s the trifecta as far as I’m concerned. I’m glad there are orgs like TNA and EVE (Equal Visibility Everywhere; check them out) helping to create this new, organized focus.
When I listen to liberal democrats voice their hatred for Sarah Palin I notice that they all have one thing in common, ignorance. They know nothing of Sarah Palin’s record of public service and the reasons for her extremely high popularity ratings during her time as governor of Alaska. They criticize her for “quiting” her governorship with out realizing that Barak O’Burka did her like he did Alice Palmer and Hillary Clinton; used his Chicago style politics to deprive the public of their prefered female public servant.
When I speak to democrats about Palin it is like trying to teach a monkey to fly. They cannot comprehend the fact that her energy policies and enviromental policies on the whole in Alaska were a stellar example for the world. Knee-jerk liberals who were manipulated against Palin by you-tube video’s of Palin hunting wolves are clueless about the way of life in a frontier state. They don’t respect the fact that we urban and suburbanites need desparetely the energy that comes from Alaska. They enjoy eating the fish that hard working fisher people like the Palins make available to them and consume the energy that they extract, while bitting the calloused hands that feed them and expect them to listen to elitist Hollwood types who pontificate about being green and leaving those cute adorable cuddly wolves alone. Adolesant rebles without a clue, all of them. I was a liberal democrat nearly all my adult life. Sarah Palin has the record in public service that I thought the democrats supported. I was so wrong about the democrats. They are the corporate enablers who disguise all their corporate monoply scams in the guise of “healthcare reform”, “Wall Street reform” and “Greening the Planet.” All of their agenda’s lead to bigger monopolies and don’t get me wrong, the republicans have had their hands in this deception themselves, but at least the republican-Tea Party voters are making the only real change in the American politics. They are taking public office back for the people and they love Palin for the same reason I am happy to support her- SHE HAS STOOD FOR THE PEOPLE not the corporations. She is way above party politics and that just doesn’t exist in the Soros sponsored democrat party. She will support a soverign USA over a global system of servitude to the global banking elite. She will preserve the Judeo Christian value system that made this nation great and gave our citizens courage and strength that I have not witnessed anywhere else in the world. She will not attempt to insert state between citizens and their GOD given rights like King Obama and his Queen Nancy have. The pagan liberal stateocrats cannot respect a women like Sarah Palin. They have become a pathetic clique of elitist sycophants, bowing to their false messiah. They are unworthy of America and the liberties it has given us.
Women are awakening to the fact that we have been little more than political pawns in the left-right ideology game, essentially a game about who controls money and power. The “ideologies” themselves are corrupt and a source of confinement for women who are afraid to think for themselves (still brainwashed into seeking male approval) and instead devote their energies to propping up what Anna Belle refers to as “fractured politics” and fractured male politicians. So this ‘new agenda’ of promoting unity of women around issues that affect all women is sorely needed and an empowering step in the right direction. Thank you for a great post.
Beautifully written post Juliette, and I too was a democrat (conservative and liberal a bit of both) until Obama. I still cannot believe how uniformed I was — with a law degree and me an avid reader.
Women–conservative, liberal, neocon, whatever — need to open our eyes and focus on the prize and this and only this will be the uniting factor that will ultimately change the world. Whenever I hear people complain about the treatment of peoples of the world I think pish posh if you are not talking about women then you are merely whining. NO ONE has had to go through and continues to suffer like women especially poor women and I am tired of it.
What happened in America, one of the most wealthy and better places to be born if you are a woman, when Hillary Rodham Clinton was stripped of her presidential victory (and don’t ever think she wasn’t) speaks to the world wide trashing of human rights when it comes to women. Genital nicking, pornography, human sex slave industry, rape, beatings, and the general beating down of women on every level in every form has to stop. And we have to be the ones to say NO.
I said NO to the Democrats, and I will vote straight ticket Republican until every Democrat is out of office. Then I will focus on voting independent and for women that have their eyes on the prize. And I will pray that women will finally unite because at that time true change will occur and this time we just might save the world.
Thank you Jennifer.