Anyone remember the Reproductive Rights National Network or R2N2 as us vets from NAM called it then in the 80's? http://www.google.com/search?q=%22Reproductive+Rights+National+Network%22&btnG=Google+Search&hl=en&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 Michael Pugliese
>--- Original Message --- >From: Diane Monaco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Date: 2/24/02 5:22:27 PM > >Rakesh wrote: > >>Diane, have you had a chance to read Rickie Lee Solinger's criticism of >>framing the fight for abortion rights in terms of choice (there was a >>favorable review in the NY TImes review of books a few weeks ago). > >Plus two excerpts from the amazon.com reviews: > >> From Publishers Weekly; Feminists need a paradigm shift, argues Solinger >> (Wake Up Little Susie;, The Abortionist), away from the post-Roe v. Wade >> concept of "choice" and back to the '60s concept of "rights," based on >> the approach of the civil rights movement, which argued that all citizens >> were entitled to vote, for instance, regardless of class status. > > >> From Booklist: Historian Solinger argues cogently that the post-Roe v. >> Wade decision to articulate the women's movement's goals in terms of >> "choice," not "rights," had fateful consequences for women and for the >> movement. > >Rakesh, I apologize for not being able to get this post out before you >unsubbed...and I will certainly miss your posts. But for what it's worth, >I have always felt uncomfortable with the movement away from "rights" to >"choice" during the 1980s. But I'm sure it is no surprise that this post >Roe v. Wade shift during the 1980s occurred when the so-called >"conservative feminists" surfaced (or were created) to "redefine" the >issues. I just heard a Christina Hoff Sommers (author of Who Stole >Feminism?) lecture the other day where she said in virtually the same >breath that she is a feminist and women are no longer oppressed in the >US. Hmmm? As far as I know, the definition of feminism hasn't changed: a >movement that works toward achieving equal rights for women and men. But >when I look at the demographic composition of upper agenda setting elites, >e.g., Congressional Committee chairs, I see a distinct absence of women (or >color). Well, if relations are not oppressed along gender lines, how would >this oddity come about? What is the probability that this would happen on >its own? > >Anyway, I think it was the anti-feminist sector that attempted to "steal >feminism." And I do agree with Solinger that it was a mistake for >feminists to move away from the rights argument. But it's of course not >too late and "NARAL" stands ready to enter as the "National Abortion and >Reproductive Rights Action League" -- hey notice the rights there! Thanks >for bringing this to our attention. > >Best, >Diane > > >
