Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: David Mixner names the ‘Twenty Most Powerful Lesbians In American Politics’ Previous entry: More on domestic terrorism

Gloating and fund-raising

Awhile ago, while writing about a survey that showed more men than women would be secretly pleased at an unintended pregnancy, I offered this theory as to why:

In our sexist society, the decision to marry is basically on the man.  Women are the ones who are supposed to be eager to get married, but they’re also the ones who are supposed to sit back and wait to be asked.  But asking is showing eagerness, but eagerness is supposed to be girly stuff, so I imagine that’s intimidating for a lot of dudes.  Ways to manage the slight emasculation inherent in picking out jewelry and showing interest in this wedding stuff include having a huge public proposal where people will side with you and her only role is to say “yes”, asking her father first and making it seem transactional, or getting over your hang-ups about masculinity and just asking.  Or….you could get her pregnant and be the conquering hero by making an honest woman of her.  As soon as I realized this, I realized what a powerful fantasy that must be to some men.  It’s the perfect way to get what you want (marriage, babies) without having to say you want that girly stuff.

This was rejected out of hand by a lot of commenters, who offered that instead it must be that men are proud their swimmers work, etc.  (I don’t think my theory is mutually exclusive from the virility concerns.)  And that all came back to mind while reading this rather distressing story from a Texas woman who had an abortion at age 34, even though she has inclination to have children some day.  For the non-misogynist, her predicament is easy to sympathize with.  Who hasn’t faced a situation where they thought they were getting what they want, but they have to turn it down because the timing is all off?  But what really jumped out at me—-and was pointed out to me in email—-was the approach the impregnator in question took:

Eventually, I called the baby’s father. He drove to town from his home out of state. He was ready to move in with me, get a steady job, co-parent, be the best kind of friends that we are since, according to him, “marriage never works anyway.” He’s divorced. “Maybe this is the excuse I needed to settle down, stop living like a nomad,” he said. It was not the response I’d predicted. But I didn’t want to to be his “excuse” for a major life change. That wouldn’t work for me.

This, as I noted,  is always going to subtly complicate the debate over whether or not women should have full autonomy over their fertility, because while some men are petrified of unintended pregnancy, many men see it as a path to True Manhood.  Personally, I think what men want is interesting and relevant, but shouldn’t have any influence over a woman’s fundamental rights.  But not everyone will see it that way.  And so the debate gets uglier and more complex, because this kind of thinking all too often causes pro-choice men to start taking a judgmental attitude to abortion, or suggesting that the anti-choice side is reasonable or moral. 

Also, I told you so.  BOO-YEAH.

All jokes aside, I want to take this opportunity to point out that the author of this piece makes it very clear that her $450 abortion was an enormous financial burden, and one she couldn’t get covered by the shitty insurance available to freelance writers.  Of course, now her predicament will be that of increasing numbers of women, because the price we paid for health care reform is the extracting of abortion coverage from insurance sold through the health care exchange.  To help alleviate the burden on women, there are abortion funds around the country that try to provide the money and other forms of assistance.  Many women come to them just for advice on how to find a good provider, but quite a few also need help paying for the abortion.  As you can imagine, they give as much as they can, but there’s never enough. 

Because of this, Jesse and I are joining the virtual bowl-a-thon to raise money for abortion funds.


As of this morning, we’ve raised $140.  I’d like to raise a lot more.  So I promise that if we reach a goal of $1,000 by April 16th, I will actually go bowling and take a picture of my score, which is bound to be comically low, so you can make fun of me.  At the $1,000 level, Jesse promises to bowl granny-style, where you roll the ball from between your legs.  Though he swears that he’ll be doing it bad-ass granny-style, like Betty White.  If we reach a goal of $5,000, I’ll do so in a T-shirt I’ll get printed up that says “Fucking magnets: How do they work?”, and will pose in that shirt at the bowling alley, so you know that I kept my promise. 

Abortion funds want to help as many women as they can, but there’s simply not enough money to go around. Which means they’re often forced to help women who need abortions brainstorm to find ways to come up with at least some of the money themselves.  The National Network of Abortion Funds sent me a list of questions they ask women in order to help them raise the money.  I’m sharing this with you, so you can get a full idea of what kind of lengths women have to go.

Snapshot 2010-04-14 10-14-41

Even a small amount can help! 

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Amanda Marcotte on 10:37 AM • (15) Comments

Done!  I really, really want to see that shirt.

Comment #1: micheyd  on  04/14  at  11:29 AM

That list is so sad.  No woman should have to fall behind on her utility bills just to get an abortion.  And when money is really that tight, why would anyone think it’s a good idea to force her to have a baby?  Even if she gives it up for adoption, the pregnancy itself will be expensive and she’ll have to take at least some time off work.

Comment #2: bananacat  on  04/14  at  01:43 PM

And when money is really that tight, why would anyone think it’s a good idea to force her to have a baby?

This. When you can barely afford an abortion, and have no health insurance, and NO PARTNER, why would anyone think forcing you to have a baby is a good idea? In Texas, if you don’t have family, it literally means forcing you and your baby to die in the gutter of starvation (Full welfare benefits here for a mother and newborn are $75 a month. Which you are somehow supposed to live on.)

I wonder if the “pro-life” elderly demographic would be so “pro-life” if they realized how many granddaughters and daughters would be moving back home with newborns, expecting free babysitting and full support.

Comment #3: KMTBERRY  on  04/14  at  02:25 PM

Done, though I’m not givin’ so some floozies can go out and have fun and slut around or nothin’, I’m givin’ because I wanna know if I’m a worse bowler than Ms. Marcotte—can you beat a 38? Yeah, that’s the challenge—38 pins knocked down! Snark

Okay, the score of 38 is my most recent bowling score, but the floozy sentiment is my sad imitation of a “pro-lifer” aka anti-female sexuality ranter, though its rather lacking.

In terms of the comments about who thinks you can/should have a baby if your budget it so tight you can’t pay your utility bills—well, there’s this thing called reality based thinking and then their are the magical thinking folks. Most anti-choicers are seriously out of touch with reality (like the magnets being magic thing from that song ellaborates that in spades). If you are a good Christian woman, than your good Christian man provides, if he’s dead its probably your fault, but divorced or no patriarchal support? You are not a good Christian woman by definition, therefore any bad or difficult thing that comes your way during pregnancy or while raising said bastard child is your fault. Pro-lifers just like to stroke off to the thought that they are somehow protected from the worse by their magical virtue and that anything bad in the world happens because of doubt in God’s desire for you to be rich and happy. Babies really are punishments for these people worthy of the crime (of simply not believing as they do—and even if their daughters “need” an abortion, it was for a good reason and she and her mamma will be back out on the picket line hating on you as soon as she can stand).

Comment #4: Thealogian  on  04/14  at  02:47 PM

In for $50. Thank you for making us aware of this organization.

From the NNAF website: “Each year, our member Funds raise and disperse over $2 million to help more than 20,000 women who would not otherwise be able to obtain abortions.” If I’m reading that right, beneficiaries get an average of $100 from the fund.  So even a $15 donation goes a long way to bridging the gap and making a huge difference in a real person’s life.

Comment #5: cycles  on  04/14  at  02:51 PM

Argh, I’m sorry to see my functioning sperm theory discredited.  (I will now sing “Every sperm is sacred” in its memory.) 

I actually faced a huge crisis of conscience in college when a friend of mine got pregnant and could not pay for her abortion.  I ended up paying for half of it, even though up until that point I had considered myself pro life.  I had a lot of interesting rationalizations at the time about how sick she was (and she was sick, she was hospitalized) and about how she’d just gone through major trauma.  But at the end of the day I did it because it was what she wanted and she is my friend. 

So yeah, I’ll totally donate as soon as I get paid.

Comment #6: shinobi42  on  04/14  at  02:53 PM

Thealogian,

You forgot Hussy, Tramp, Harlot, Strumpet and Jezebel.

And as long as I’m here, I’d just like to say:  Fuck Bart Stupak.

Comment #7: Sour Kraut  on  04/14  at  03:06 PM

It kills me that things are so bad in this country that $450 is such a burden to so many people.  $450 would certainly be a setback for me, draining a good amount of my savings, but I’m so lucky to have savings.

Comment #8: keshmeshi  on  04/14  at  03:14 PM

OK, I can’t resist the idea of a photo of Amanda bowling either ... my best performance is 1 for 139, lets see if you can better that? (and none of this under-arm bowling, Aussie-style)

Comment #9: firefall  on  04/14  at  04:41 PM

You forgot Hussy, Tramp, Harlot, Strumpet and Jezebel.

Strumpet?  I am so reclaiming that one for myself!

Comment #10: bananacat  on  04/14  at  05:34 PM

You forgot Tart too. I’ll reclaim tart.

I looked down that list and realized I can’t answer yes to any of those questions! I’ll see if we’ve got money free to donate cause I’ve been there.  If there hadn’t been a car title loan at the right time, I’d be “mom” to more than a cat!

Comment #11: Godless Heathen  on  04/14  at  05:47 PM

couch cushions?

holy fuck.. there’s no image that could more clearly present the clusterfuckyess of this than a woman searching her couch for enough change to pay for an abortion hmmm

Comment #12: jadehawk  on  04/14  at  07:04 PM

that made the entirely wrong smiley.

Comment #13: jadehawk  on  04/14  at  07:05 PM

As a pro-choice guy who has, as long as I’ve been aware of the issue, felt that women must have the right to decide what to do with their bodies, I figure it’s about time I put my money where my mouth is, here’s $50 for the cause, Amanda!

Comment #14: Elliot  on  04/14  at  07:45 PM

Damn! Godless Heathen beat me to tart.

Is it me or does floozy sound like a cleaning apparatus advertised on late night TV. As in, “Can’t reach those high windows? Let the easy-to-use Floozy do it for you!”

Comment #15: shakahi  on  04/15  at  03:02 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.