Abortion and the Obliteration of Women… By Whitney Farmer – Un Pop Culture

May 25, 2011 Whitney Farmer 0 Comments

Whitney runs a rock music venue on the beach in L.A.. She has an M.B.A, and will likely be despised by both Red and Blue states after this column.

Results of the most recent census data in India reveal the dramatic rise of female selective abortions, termed foeticide in the international press coverage. The rates are estimated to be between 6 and 8 million sex-selective terminations in that country over the last decade.  Contrary to supposition, these rates are higher in affluent and educated population centers due to the dependence on ultrasound technology for gender determination and the access to abortion services. Researchers from Toronto University’s Center for Global Health estimate that there have been approximately 12 million gender-based abortions conducted in India over the past 30 years, keeping pace with the rise of ultrasound service access.

The social causes for the trend in that country have been linked to the still-prevalent custom of dowry marriages. However, that same trend is present in all countries with access to ultrasound and abortion services, even without a dowry tradition. The rate increases with economic affluence and education.

Beyond the immediately troubling implications of these statistics, there are genetic ramifications that need to be analyzed. Generally, for every 100 females that are conceived, there are 110 males conceived. But from the moment of conception and throughout every demographic in life, more males die than females.  Initially, this appears due to genetic hardiness that is provided to females as a result of having two of the same chromosomes – XX – rather than one of each in males – XY. The theory is that there is a shield in the event that there is an abnormality in one. Without intervention, more males are miscarried than females. After birth, more males die from all causes than females within the same age bracket.  Within the years of fertility, the population numbers are relatively even. Beyond that, females begin to outpace males in numbers. How will tipping the population scale even more dramatically affect us…?

The numbers in Jhajjar, the hub of gender-selected abortions, are estimated to be 87.4 females to 100 males brought to term.  Rather than demonstrating a model of widespread reproductive freedom, accounts of social pressure to abort daughters appear to be astonishingly acceptable and endemic. And India is not alone in this trend.

In the United States, innovations in contraceptive technology have slowed nearly to a halt since Roe v. Wade. Choices have remained stagnant, limited to variations of hormone level manipulations only available to women. The potential life-threatening consequences of blood-clot related complications are also borne only by women.  Statistically, the presence of a fail-safe procedure in the event of contraceptive failure has led to less innovation in research and development.  And because innovations could lead to a consequent decrease in revenues to the medical establishment for abortion-related services, the financial incentives are negligible.

On the economic front, gender equality continues to manifest in the workplace as gender neutrality. Women still walk in the door worth less because they have ovaries and a womb. The Mommy Track compensation structure continues to be viewed as both morally defensible and economically viable. In a recent book ‘The Psychopath Test’ by Jon Ronsom, the author describes a 4 times greater incidence of psychopathic traits in executive levels of business. These traits, simplified as a severe absence of empathy, statistically provide economic advantages. Childbearing statistically increases economic fragility and de facto provides a compulsion towards reduced fertility as a matter of necessity rather than choice.

Because contraceptive technology advances have stagnated in lieu of dependence on a gatekeeper-dependent, financially motivated abortion infrastructure, it must be concluded that women have encountered decreased reproductive freedom rather than increased options.

As a Christian living in a world where women are raped by fathers and brothers and cousins and loves and strangers, I’m not given an easy way out. How I view abortion needs to be formed and tested by what is in scripture.  When I read the scriptures however, rather than swallowing what someone with an unwholesome agenda spits up, I find instructions that differ sometimes dramatically from what is described by the politically ambitious as being the Word of the Lord.

In scripture, I find that the victim of rape is blameless and that all of the guilt connected with that act rests on the attacker. Wouldn’t this mean a subsequent abortion, if it is in fact a sin? I find that when two men get in a fight and that – during that fight – one accidently injures the pregnant wife of the other and causes a miscarriage, this is a property crime and not manslaughter. I read that rights of ownership begin with birth. I read that there is enmity between the serpent and women from the beginning. And I read that all these events occur under the gaze of the One who formed us and knew us before we were born.

For me, some abortions would be compromise. I believe in God, and that means perks as well as accountability. For me, an abortion could mean that I was too frightened to admit that my strength had failed. Pulpits in America brag about gluttony but speak with contempt about sexual desire. Not biblical, but unfortunately true, and peer pressure is an unholy beast to resist.  For me, having an abortion could mean that I had been too frightened to admit that my God provides for all of my needs, including financial. If I was told to terminate for health reasons? I don’t know what I’d do because I have, at best, guarded trust in a profit-motivated medical system. If I was raped? I would probably carry the child to term, but not because I believe that it would be sinful to abort. In reading scripture, there are precedents that suggest that any weight of the blood guilt of this would rest on the shoulders of the attacker. But I would want to carry to term because I would want to be noncompliant enough to not give my money to a medical establishment that is making a killing on harvesting women’s bodies, and profiting from killing women before they are born. I might decide to give the child up for adoption, but I’d still want to be contrary enough to bring life out of the darkness of a brutal and violent act.  I would pray to God that she would be a girl. And I would give her the name of a warrior.

Quote of the Blog, from ‘Me and Bobby McGee’, by Janice Joplin: “Freedom’s just another word for nothin’ left to lose…”