By Kamardip Singh
When walking down Sheridan Road Monday morning, my first reaction to the flags lined up next to the sidewalk was one of appreciation. I was under the delusion that these American flags were some demonstration of healthy patriotism or to mourn the loss of soldiers in Iraq. Instead, I realized that this was a purposefully inflammatory anti-choice display by Northwestern Students for Life.
I want to express my disgust and anger with this hostile display. It is instances such as this that make feminists like me angry.
Rather than question why any woman would choose to undergo an abortion, why women ever have to end up in this situation or why people support abortion, Students for Life instead chose to show its intransigent stance.
Instead of becoming educated about the context surrounding abortion and being open-minded, the group instead decided to take action that would clearly divide this campus.
Furthermore, by sending out press releases to the all the major newspapers before speaking about the issue, Students For Life made it clear it is intolerant of having any sort of open discussion about abortion. They sought only an incensed, reactionary dialogue.
Not only did they choose to show off their extremism along Sheridan Road, but also used American flags to do it, furthering my disgust. Are they trying to tell me that my pro-choice views are anti-American? When did it become American to intimidate the views of another? And this display was intimidating – it gave me no way to defend my stance and told me in a loud voice what they thought about my views.
This conflation of the anti-abortion stance with American patriotism saddens me. By using the flag to convey their views, they equated their values and American values as being one and the same, ignoring the diversity of opinions in this country, as well as ignoring a woman’s freedom to choose.
If Students for Life was genuinely concerned about the rate of abortions, then group members would spend their time advocating for adequate sex education (instead of the abstinence-only type that is being advocated in schools now) and the accessibility of birth control and protection. It is only through these approaches that the rates of abortions can be decreased.
Instead, they chose to turn the issue of abortion into a black-and-white moral issue. Their display was a simplistic approach to explaining abortion (3,700 flags somehow easily explains the supposed moral degradation of this country) and leaves no room to debate the issue or to become educated about it.
And to consider Students for Life’s statement on “the moral question of abortion” – abortion did not become a major moral issue until feminism started gaining force and sexist politicians chose to attack feminism by claiming moral superiority.
Their reference to Susan B. Anthony is ahistorical – they ignored the fact that Susan B. Anthony and feminists of her time attempted to stop abortion by focusing on the conditions in which women found themselves (poor education, lack of economic independence and lack of choice).
Such a focus is not something I’ve seen Students for Life ever promote. By choosing an inflammatory approach to express its views that does not advocate an open discussion, it has made it evident that what it really wants to do is tell women to stop being human and start being baby-making machines.
Weinberg senior Kamardip Singh is the co-director of College Feminists. She can be reached at [email protected].