![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
a response to Le Guin on abortion
Jul. 17th, 2024 09:51 pmI am absolutely certain that I'm not the first to have said any of this. I don't wish to have any credit for it, I just wish to write out my thoughts. The words want to speak themselves, I think Le Guin would understand.
But what I want to say is that I am disappointed with Ursula K. Le Guin's piece "What It Was Like", a talk given at a meeting of Oregon NARAL in January 2004. I object, in particular, to its argumentation. The thesis is pro-abortion rights/pro-choice, but the argumentation follows the logic of the anti-abortionists.
Le Guin argues that, had she not (illegally) aborted her first pregnancy, she would never have had the three children she went on to have later in her life: "If I had not broken the law and aborted that life nobody wanted, [my three children] would have been aborted by a cruel, bigoted, senseless law. They would never have been born."
This sidesteps the most central issue: bodily autonomy. The right to not be pregnant, whatever the reason, reasoning, or circumstances.
More than following conservative anti-choice logic, Le Guin obeys it, but not blindly. The authoritarians cry, "Women must give birth, they have no choice in the matter! Their bodies are our property!" Le Guin hears this, has clearly considered it, and comes out to say, "No, actually we must breed better."
Breed, womb-man! Birth more spawn!
But what I want to say is that I am disappointed with Ursula K. Le Guin's piece "What It Was Like", a talk given at a meeting of Oregon NARAL in January 2004. I object, in particular, to its argumentation. The thesis is pro-abortion rights/pro-choice, but the argumentation follows the logic of the anti-abortionists.
Le Guin argues that, had she not (illegally) aborted her first pregnancy, she would never have had the three children she went on to have later in her life: "If I had not broken the law and aborted that life nobody wanted, [my three children] would have been aborted by a cruel, bigoted, senseless law. They would never have been born."
This sidesteps the most central issue: bodily autonomy. The right to not be pregnant, whatever the reason, reasoning, or circumstances.
More than following conservative anti-choice logic, Le Guin obeys it, but not blindly. The authoritarians cry, "Women must give birth, they have no choice in the matter! Their bodies are our property!" Le Guin hears this, has clearly considered it, and comes out to say, "No, actually we must breed better."
Breed, womb-man! Birth more spawn!
