By now, you may have seen the new Gallup statistics screaming “More Americans Pro-Life Than Pro-Choice for the First Time.” Sounds scary, right? Hell yes it does. But the question, of course, is what it actually means.
My very first thought on this was that a person saying they’re “pro-life” doesn’t necessarily mean that they want abortion to be illegal. A lot of people, actually, say they’re pro-life, and then follow up with “but I don’t think we should make it illegal or anything.” They say it because they personally think that abortion is wrong, and therefore don’t want to be associated with it, despite the fact that they feel that each woman should get to make her own choice. And that, of course, is what we call “pro-choice,” at least in the strictest political sense, if not the activist one.
Of course, that is the first question asked in these findings: do you consider yourself pro-choice or pro-life? Apparently 51% of respondents answered “pro-life” and 42% answered “pro-choice.” Admittedly, this is a significant jump from last year when the numbers fell at 44% pro-life and 50% pro-choice.
But the answers to the next questions are a whole lot more significant. Do respondents think abortion should be legal under all circumstances, legal under most circumstances, legal only in a few circumstances, or illegal in all circumstances? It turns out that a vast majority think it should be legal in at least some circumstances, if hardly tilted in the end in the favor we’d like.
As Scott further points out, though, these questions are framed really badly, and always have been. To me, “legal under most circumstances” means “well yeah, women should be able to get abortions, but not the ones who I think are total sluts!” And “legal only under a few circumstances” means “illegal except for a woman’s health or in cases of rape/incest.” But they could mean totally different things to you. And they have an even better chance of meaning something totally different to those who don’t spend a lot of time looking at and analyzing the rhetoric around abortion — you know, a majority of respondents. Further, with the exception of total bans on abortion with exceptions for health and rape/incest, deciding which “reasons” a woman gets to have an abortion for is not exactly how public policy works. It’s how public judgment works.
And most interesting to me, and I think relevant to any discussion on the matter, is the fact that a big old part of the shift has come from the Republican side. Among Republicans, there has been a 10% shift away from the pro-choice label to the pro-life one in just this year. Could it be this backlash against Obama that conservatives are conducting at the moment? After all, they keep framing him as “radically pro-abortion” and insisting on stronger ideological purity among their members. Which means that if it is a factor, and there really is a shift, it could only be temporary.
I’m not saying, however, that we have no reason to be concerned. Actually, I think we should be concerned, if not directly because of this poll. The anti-choice movement has been controlling the discourse surrounding abortion for far too long now. The fact that so many people would brand themselves “pro-life” when they clearly don’t want an all-out ban says something about pro-choice public relations and anti-choice bias in the media (in the name of “presenting both sides” even when one side is using lies).
But I’d also argue that despite the fact that many people want to run away from the pro-choice label, and despite the fact that the anti-choice movement has determined the direction of the conversation on abortion for many years now, the fact that only 23% of Americans want to see a total ban says that we’re doing pretty damn well, all things considered. We just need to do better. Especially when our president, who is supposed to be pro-choice and is called “radical” by anti-choicers, seems uncomfortable and twitchy whenever the subject comes up and keeps on ceding the moral ground to the anti-choice crowd. And when his is a voice that most Americans are going to associate with “pro-choice” at the moment, that shit has to stop.
End result: the fact that most Americans want some kind of restrictions placed on abortion isn’t exactly something to cheer. And it’s absolutely something to work to change. The thing is that it’s just not the news most people are suggesting it is. To the contrary, Americans have unfortunately supported those restrictions for a long time.
What do you think?
{ 1 trackback }
{ 31 comments }
I think we have got to do a better job of meeting the anti-abortionists’ rhetoric head-on. I agree that Obama’s backpedaling is a problem. It is a problem that most Democratic politicians shy away from full, open support of abortion. When you act like something is shameful or seedy, people pick up on it.
I also think we need to hit people where they live. If “gross” abortion pictures turn people’s stomachs, we need to set up a website with gross pictures of unwanted, neglected and abused babies. We need to dig up old orphanage pictures and put them up. We need to dig up the stories of women who were forced to have babies until they died. Gut-level reactions count for a lot. I firmly believe most people’s inability to fully support abortion stems from the queasy feeling that they get when the “abortion is murder” crowd starts bellowing. Even silly things have an impact. for example, a few weeks ago there was a post (I’m not sure if it was here or at Pandagon) about those famous fetal development pics being made with aborted fetuses. When I told people this, they really did a double-take. It made them think. They were saying stuff like, “God! My mom read that book to me when I was a kid! Those were dead fetuses?” or “But pro-life places use those thumb-sucking pictures all the time!” I could see the look on their faces- they were struggling with the suddenly negative connotation something that had always been positive for them suddenly took on. Showing people the gray is important. Pictures are powerful.
I also think humor is a strong weapon. Pointing out the absurdity of anti-abortion arguments is always fun, and it usually leaves people a little ashamed that they went along with those arguments. Just for giggles, I’ve been working on a little project called Mush and Peanut, which is a series of short parody cartoons about a conservative “commentator’s” asinine views. I’ve posted it at my blog, if you follow the link on my name. I’ve got a series up on abortion now. The movies are pretty basic, as I am no great artiste, but in more capable hands, a series of viral videos on such topics could reach a lot of people who really just want to be entertained, but whose opinions count on issues like this.
In other words, the headline should read, “Most Americans have no freaking idea what “pro-life” means, thanks in part to Gallup.”
This sort of relates to me, except I wouldn’t have answered this poll since I know they would like to slant it to their own interpretations.
I personally don’t believe in abortion, but don’t believe that I should have the right to tell other women what to do. I think you can differentiate between what you believe and what you think is best for others to decide.
I’m a Gen Xer, so maybe I’m misreading the situation, but it seems lately when the subject of abortion comes up among younger people (teens and 20-somethings), they seem to believe that abortion is murder, and I find that very disturbing.
I agree with Cara that (unfortunately) the anti-choice has been controlling the discourse and they have gotten their message out better than the pro-choicers. I also wonder though, if being pro-life it’s a symptom of growing up in time when abortion has always been legal. It’s easy to say “I’d never have an abortion” when a woman has the option of changing her mind.
Maybe Neka Onna has the right idea about putting out positive messages about abortion rights. I just hope we don’t have to go back to horror show of the days before Roe to convince young women that abortion always needs to be legal.
I tell people I’m “pro-abortion.” I’m so sick of the “Pro-life,” “pro-choice” rhetoric and having to pretend that I’m somehow deeply offended by the very concept of abortion but equally–yay, nobly!-believe it should be a woman’s “choice.”
Obviously I’m not running around doing the happy dance for dead babies. But “pro-choice” has come to mean “against abortion BUT”, hence the survey confusion.
In my opinion, if one famous woman- any famous woman- came out and said, “Yeah, I’ve had an abortion,” that would do more than anything else to move the ball of our national conversation on abortion.
I can turn those survey results around with two words: “Anti-Coat Hanger”. The “pro-choice” side did their supporters a terrible dis-service by using that name. “Life” is ALWAYS going to sound more important than “choice”. As in “its her choice but its the baby’s LIFE. The bottom line is that two cells ain’t a baby. But you’ve allowed them to frame the argument. If you change the argument to “Yeah, I’m pro-life but I’m ANTI-COAT HANGER” you totally disarm the opposition. You force them to answer the question is passing laws really going to mean fewer abortions? Or will it just mean illegal abortions in unsafe conditions. Let’s think it through and not settle for the APPEARANCE of a solution. And no frikken way are they going to win that argument. Seriously start telling these so called “pro-life” people that you’re “anti-coat hanger” and just look at the expression on their faces. Quit playing the game by their rules.
We need to separate the “abortion is murder” reasoning from the “certain women don’t deserve it” reasoning. Start making it clear how difficult to attain and expensive abortions tend to be; attack the perception that you just go down to your regular doctor’s office, pay a standard copay, have a procedure that’s no more invasive than a pap smear, and that’s the end of things.
Also start asking, if people think this hypothetical “irresponsible” woman doesn’t deserve an abortion because she’s too frivolous/slutty/irresponsible, what do they think she’d do with the baby once it’s born? Something tells me they’re not thinking ahead that far. They’re just going “abortion = get-out-of-jail-free pass” but not a single thought in their heads about how the negative consequences in question involve a child being placed in her care.
Additionally, the “what punishment is appropriate for a slutty woman getting an abortion?” question might be well applied to said people.
Despite the vagueness of the questions, it still disturbs me that for the people who think it should be legal in certain circumstances, about 2.5 times more people think abortion should be legal in only a few circumstances than abortion should be legal in most circumstances. So 60% of people surveyed think abortion should always be illegal or legal in only a few circumstances (so most women having abortions shouldn’t be allowed to have them).
I’m actually really curious about the possible explanation behind the Republican shift from pro-choice to pro-life attitudes. If I had to hazard a guess, I’d chalk it up to ideological drift (caused by closer ideological identification with a smaller conservative minority) and simple partisanship; like you noted, Republicans are looking for ways to differentiate themselves from Democrats, and abortion is as good a reason as any.
Sadly, I think that won’t really change many hardened hearts. Most people who are really stridently anti-abortion really believe the woman deserves what she gets, and most fence-riders don’t want to think about abortion enough to tease out the real meaning of that name. I really do think things like pictures will sway more people than most anything else. When you see a picture of a woman bleeding to death form a coathanger abortion, its harder to dehumanize her. You also don’t have to connect any of the dots for yourself.
That’s a good observation, Marq. I read about that in Thom Hartmann’s “Cracking the Code.” But anti-choicers stole “pro-life” from the group that was against the death penalty. I’m not sure if pro-choice came after anti-choicers took “pro-life.”
Now what if this question was asked:
“Do you believe women should have the right to choose to have a child?”
How many times have you heard pro-choicers say “I believe women should have the right to choose abortion”? If there’s one thing the anti-choice movement has right, it’s those signs of “abortions” with the word “choice” on them (it doesn’t matter to anyone that the abortions are actually still births, if not complete fabrications). Too often, pro-choicers mean abortion when they say “a woman’s right to choose.” Well, if she has the right to choose abortion, that means she has the right to choose to have a child. I mean, those are the only two options pregnant women have: have an abortion or have a child. If she doesn’t have the right to abortion, then she’s being forced to have a child. Of course most people are going to say that they do believe women should be able to choose to have a child, even those who say they’re pro-life.
But what about those people who believe being pregnant is having a child? They make up a tiny fraction of the pro-life movement, and there’s no reasoning with them. Their issues go beyond some errors in logic. But for the pro-lifers in this survey who are actually pro-choice, it wouldn’t be too difficult for them to realize that their opinions on abortion don’t fall in line to what the pro-life movement really wants.
Another case of playing with the numbers to get a story.
One thing to look at with the poll is the margin of error: 3 points for the current poll.
If the margin of error for the previous poll was also 3 points then it is not correct to say there has been a shift.
In fact, statistically the numbers for the two polls are unchanged.
An excellent post. I’ve found that most people are somewhat well-meaning in their stance on abortion… like they don’t want it to just be an out for “sluts” or they definitely think it should be allowed in cases of rape/incest but that’s it (I’m not saying these are the right stances to have, but I can see why people would have them). The issue is that most people don’t realize what that means. In the case of “sluts” they don’t know that most women who have abortions are already mothers who want the best for the children they already have. In the case of rape, I usually just have to ask “So you’re demanding that a woman PROVE that she was raped in a court of law in order to have an abortion?” and often people realize that would be a bad idea.
People often have a good idea in their minds about when they think abortion should be used, but most people have no idea how to translate that into policy. Or how existing policies actually affect women (ie, supporting parental notification laws, and not realizing what that actually does to young women).
I think this is where the problem really lies. The people who strictly believe that abortion should NEVER be allowed are probably not going to change that stance. It’s the people who don’t have the information that they need to make an informed decision that we need to be engaging.
And Richard, thanks for pointing out the margin of error. Quick, someone do a chi squared test! :-)
Tony Wu, some years ago actress Ali McGraw related in an interview her experience in obtaining an illegal abortion. It was quite horrific, but at the
time I read that, the ant-choice people weren’t shooting doctors or bombing clinics.
There are rumors of other famous people choosing to terminate pregnancies, so, yes, one should have the guts to come forward if they can spare some agony a sister might have.
I also recall reading that when he was growing up Frank Sinatra’s mom was well known for “helping out”, young women who “got into trouble”.
OTOH, this probably has at least as much to do with shibboleths like “partial-birth” abortion as with genuine revulsion over ending a pregnancy. It is disturbing, but it’s disturbing in the same way that preference for civil-unions is: I think these people actually don’t want to see women getting hurt.
I don’t use coat-hangers, btw. I use slippery elm. The anti-women’s-lives faction has managed to make people forget that abortion was illegal for decades, and the only result was terror and suffering for half the population of the country. We tried their policy, just as other countries have, and it didn’t work. It never works. Women sought abortion when death was a risk inherent to the method. Jail time is not a deterrent, and neither is sepsis or sterility. We will trade unconscionable interference in the lives and medical privacy of women for nothing.
We don’t hear from women who have actually had abortions, or at least not enough. I bet quite a few who are out right against any abortion, they’re not actually thinking of the living, breathing, women who are going through the procedure. I wish we could hear more from them-all sides. From those that may regret the decision, those that aren’t happy but feel it was the right choice, to those who have no bad feelings towards their experience what so ever. I think it would definitely have an effect for people to see women discussing their experiences. Unfortunately, it’s probably hard to speak up when so many are quick to judge, and do so harshly.
A lot of these polls and statistics aren’t even close to being accurate or statistically significant. The sample groups are usually of areas that are frequently biased towards a certain issue, or they’re too small. When I see Fox News or rightist organizations claiming people feel a certain way towards an issue (note how it’s always in favor of conservatism), I’m never worried, however, this is true of liberally biased and even unbiased polls and statistics as well.
I think the old argument that “abortion was illegal and it only made women suffer” is a strawman because most pragmatic people who want to limit abortion don’t want back-alley abortions but just want to reduce the number of late term abortions. By by the time abortion was made legal, and certainly now, women with the wherewithal to obtain an abortion, almost by definition, would know that they are pregnant fairly early on and could take care of it sooner rather than later.
My sense – not from this poll but in general – is that most people these days don’t mind abortion if it’s early on but think abortions in the second and third trimester are problematic.
I am completely ignoring the issue of serious birth defects/rape/incest/ etc. For most abortions, these things are not relevant though.
Good point. I always forget the strawman about late term abortions, because when I think of abortion, in inherently think of the 90% of abortions that are performed in the first trimester (and additional 6% performed shortly thereafter). But you’re probably right that it’s what a lot of people were referring to when they said they think there ought to be restrictions.
Whether they think restrictions on when abortion should be able to take place based on gestational stage qualify as allowing abortion in “most” circumstances or “a few” circumstances, of course, is anyone’s guess. Thus is the nature and problem of vaguely worded questions.
Abortion should always be legal, no matter what. Pro-choice all the way.
Also, I get this sinking feeling everytime I look at anti-choice site banners or posters…I can’t help but see “Save (white) babies!!!”, no matter the message. Is it just me?
The whole concept of abortion laws is insulting, IMO. Their existence implies that foetuses (or the precious, sweet, innocent unborn baybeeez) need to be protected from their evil/slutty/homicidal/stupid/irrational mothers who would otherwise be running around terminating 38 week pregnancies just for entertainment. They completely ignore the fact that the vast, vast majority of women who have abortions (including late term ones) do so for good reasons, and that no one is in a better position to know what the best course of action than individual pregnant women. Those who advocate laws restricting abortion have no respect for women as moral agents. It infuriates me.
I haven’t seen anyone anywhere echoing my immediate reaction to the Gallup report, so here goes:
In the last year, we had a HUGE media shitstorm, the upshot of which was the destruction of the Republican party (yay!) in exchange for the apotheosis of the Palins, mère et fille, for “Chosing Life”. Since he couldn’t win the presidency, John McCain turned his campaign into a three-month ad and media blitz for how you should keep a fetus no matter what — even if it has Down syndrome, you already have three kids, you’re in a job that requires constant travel and stress and might cause a miscarriage spontaneously… or even “you’re seventeen and your parents have well-known barbaric attitudes toward promiscuity, and your boyfriend is a total flake”.
After that much publicity, we should expect “Pro Life” to be more popular than Coca Cola. It’ll fade, and it doesn’t mean women won’t make their own choices if they have to.
Most people, even people who seem to be liberal, generally well-informed, and intelligent, seem to think elective abortions are available up until the birth, and most certainly past the point of viability. They are not.
If this question was worded, “Do you think abortion should be available up until the point of viability, and then only for medical reasons after?” which is the status quo, I think the results would be enormously different.
What MomTFH said.
The average pro-lifer thinks women are terminating 37 week pregnancies, having the brains sucked out of perfectly healthy babies for shits and giggles.
Acquainting them with the laws, the reality and the REASONS for intact D&X doesn’t phaze them. They find the image useful, and the reality of an average woman losing a wanted child with extreme hydrocephalus to be…disquieting.
I think this past election cycle has a lot to do with the most recent crop of polls than anything else. These numbers probably are not the product of the candidates themselves but conservative media. Limbaugh and others explicitly discussed abortion, which in the past, has mostly been a non-starter in maintstream talk radio.
Additionally, and I’m not sure exactly how to describe this, but some of the factors surrounding Sarah Palin lead to a glamorization of pro-life ideas. In short, I think a lot of people within the influence of Republican media now feel more comfortable identifying with a strong pro-life position. The conditions that fostered this rise in pro-life identification were temporary, and I think this effect in the polls will dissipate.
WRT women openly talking about their abortions–they do so here, and unlike Obama’s rhetoric at Notre Dame (and the rhetoric of squeamish Dems who would rather throw us bitches under the bus)–it often isn’t “wrenching.” Most women are relieved.
The whole late-term abortion moral panic is a triumph of rhetoric over facts. We already have provisions to make it easier in the early part of the pregnancy and progressively more difficult as the pregnancy continues–women can’t just wake up one day in their eighth or ninth month and deciding that hey! Time for thab abortion! When they are done (and late term abortions are very rare) they are done for health reasons.
What I would like to see from the no-choice crowd is an acknowledgement that the solutions they offer–such as adoption–actually do serious psycholocial harm to the mother. But this has always been about punishing women.
It is well known among people who make polls that the phrasing of the question will significantly affect people’s answers. Reputable polling agencies, knowing that no question can be perfectly phrased, will use the same phrases in different polls in order to have a consistent, though not necessarily accurate responses. Of course phrases such as pro-life and pro-choice will constantly change in meaning from the uses of the phrase in media, politics, or acadamia. Unfortunately these phrases are used to gain media access. More in-depth studies ask: “Do you support a woman’s access to abortion in cases of rape?” (80% say yes) “Do you support a woman’s access to abortion in all cases, regardless of reason or term?” (35%) Look for the Pew Center polling on the subject for those figures and more.
I remember reading some part of that poll where they speculated that Obama’s particularly liberal views on abortion may have caused some confusion as to what it meant to be “pro-choice”. I’d be interested to see what a neutrally worded and more comprehensive survey would say about the opinions on elective first trimester abortions. That’s where the real issue lies, I think…
Also, about the exceptions in cases of rape and incest: women don’t have to prove that they were raped in court; they just have to be willing to talk to the police and file a report after having had an abortion. Most women obviously won’t file a false report, so this is really all that is necessary to enforce the restriction.
A couple points about this, hellogoodbye.
1) Going to the police (and filing a report about your abortion) are not insignificant things. What if you were raped by an officer? What if the officers don’t believe you. How much extra time off of work do you have to take? And do you really want police agencies to have records of every woman in their area who have had an abortion? What if a woman has more than one.. will that raise doubts on her claims?
2) False reports. I’m sure everyone on this site knows most women won’t file a false rape report, but that doesn’t mean the police or anyone else will believe you. Just look at popular opinion.
The central irony in the right’s argument is that, if their goal is to reduce the number of abortions, comprehensive sex education, contraception and better social services actually do more to reduce the number of abortions than their failed attempts at making abortions illegal. But since it’s clear that their goal is not reducing the number of abortions, but penalizing sexual behavior, they continue to vote against practical measures that would achieve their stated goals.
They’re liars and hypocrites. If they wanted to be taken seriously, they need to create a world where abortions are unnecessary, not illegal. As it is, Democratic policies do more to reduce abortion than Republican ones. But they wouldn’t dare to acknowledge that, because then they’d lose even more “pro-life” voters.
Comments on this entry are closed.