Trigger warning. This blog may contain sensitive material in relation to abortion and reproductive rights. I will try to be as objective as possible.
Picture source: https://www.shutterstock.com/image-photo/new-york-ny-may-21-2019-1404095372
For this week’s learning, I was instructed to read and analyze Ronnie Zoe Hakwins’ excerpt entitled: “Reproductive Choices: The Ecological Dimension.” In the beginning of this reading, Hawkins wrote:
“In this essay I will argue that environmental considerations are relevant to the abortion debate and, conversely, that the abortion dispute ought to enter into a discussion of ‘feminism and the environment.'” (Hakwins, 690)
In other words, Hawkins intentions includes convincing the reader that one cannot consider the national debate on abortion without the global implications. Hawkins emphasized the population. She drew connections between the “5 and 6 billion people worldwide” and the restrictions and/or access to birth control.
Hawkins points out that our global environment suffers because of our increasing population. There are links between poverty and environmental degradation, or what she calls a
“downward spiral.– a growing number of poor people are forced to make a living on increasingly marginal land, with resultant deforestation, overgrazing, soil erosion, or an assortment of other environmental problems further exacerbating their poverty and often leading them to move on and repeat the process elsewhere.”
In this respect, I completely agree with Hakwins. There are women out there having babies against their will with the full knowledge that they won’t be able to care for that child in a way that that child deserves. However, women who do not have access to abortion clinics are forced to conceive a human being without the support that they need. As a result, they are now responsible for two lives. Eventually, they fall below the poverty line if they were not already there to begin with.
“While efforts to diminish consumption and to restructure the global economic scheme can and should be advocated in light of this relation, so can a further slowing of our rate of population increase.” (Hawkins, 692)
If every woman had a right to abortion and access to clinics, those who are not ready to become mothers would not have to be. Moreover, we could decrease the population growth and that would gradually become beneficial for the environment. Humans continue to demolish nature’s beauty, disrupt natural habitats and ecosystems. By taking this one step to slow the growth of our populations, other species can prosper.
It’s like killing several birds with one stone. If everyone were pro-choice, the human population and the environment would benefit. Feminist Katha Pollitt argues that abortion could be viewed as a public good.
“Pollitt notes, for example, that between 1970 and 1990, “the Pill accounted for nearly three quarters of the increase in the number of women who became doctors and lawyers.”
This shows that women who are able to control the course of their own lives can contribute positively to our society. Women deserve the rights to abortion because they have more to offer than the patriarchal role designed for them. Women can be more than mothers. Women can be more than mothers. Women can be more than mothers.
”the right to an abortion is fundamental to women’s equality, not just our privacy.” (Valenti, The Guardian)
Everyone please take care during these unprecedented times.
Everything in love,
Cece X.
Hawkins, Ronnie Zoe. “Reproductive Choice: The Ecological Dimension.” 1993.
Hey Cece, I really enjoyed the points you made in your blog post. Especially, when it comes to the need of equality for all women in order to benefit society as a whole. It continues to astonish me how countries like the Dominican Republic have criminalized the act of abortion. While the poverty rate has decreased within the past few years “more than a third of the Dominican Republic lives on less than $1.25 a day and over 20 percent of the country lives in extreme poverty” (Lamm). Sadly, rural communities are constantly over looked in comparison to the touristic areas. Meaning those rural communities that depend on the farming industry receive little to no help from the government to address the low agricultural productivity. While the country has assess to technology in order to increase crop production, rural farmers simply do not have access to these resources due to financial circumstances. Not only are food resources scarce “Half of the country does not have access to clean water, and over half of the country does not have sanitary toilets” (Lamm). In cases like this one I don’t understand why governments continue to penalize abortions seeing as the population growth simply adds on to what Hawkins refers to as the “downward spiral” a vicious cycle of poverty and environmental degradation. I do wonder if you think this maybe a far fetched idea? Do you think women necessarily consider the environmental affects when making such a personal decision?
https://borgenproject.org/poverty-dominican-republic/
Hey Cece,
Usually we agree on blogs but this one I’ll have to disagree, :'( sad moment but we are grown we can do this. There was a passage you said “In this respect, I completely agree with Hakwins. There are women out there having babies against their will with the full knowledge that they won’t be able to care for that child in a way that that child deserves. However, women who do not have access to abortion clinics are forced to conceive a human being without the support that they need. As a result, they are now responsible for two lives. Eventually, they fall below the poverty line if they were not already there to begin with.” You also said you agree. Though I think you should also think about the traumatizing affects it has on the person they might not be ‘strong’ enough to end a life thats inside of them. Totally understandable that hey they might have just had some fun and boom now they are pregnant but just because their birth may or may not impact the earth doesn’t mean they should choose to abort their child. Though I also support Hakwins on an eco level which yet again proposes the question, am I an eco-feminist? I think we should continue this conversation through this blog response. Will you be able to handle opinions? I don’t want us to say something and harm the others feelings by accident. I just think we should really rip apart this article and put it side by side with an article that argues it. Let me know, I would love to get your intake and maybe we could do a blog on it, in our own time?