Why is abortion such a profitable issue for the far right?
The other night I watched a presentation on Netflix featuring Brené Brown. Though her talk itself had nothing to do with abortion, she made an astute observation in it that I think is directly relevant to this issue.
It is much easier to cause pain than to feel pain, she said. When people can’t handle the latter, they sometimes resort to the former because they’re trying to work their shit out on others.
For me this brings to mind some of the loudest voices in the so-called “pro-life” movement: the ones who point their fingers, look down from their moral high horses, and cast the issue as an us-versus-them battle. The ones who advocate most zealously for draconian restrictions and bans instead of initiatives that actually honor, dignify, and help people. The ones who picket, publicly pray, or display Scripture in front of Planned Parenthood clinics. The ones who favor policies that seek to shame women who are already faced with a gut-wrenching decision, such as forcing them to look at an ultrasound of their unborn child before proceeding with an abortion.
I have to wonder: Where is that shame actually coming from?
It is so much easier to cause pain than to feel pain. When people can’t handle the latter, they sometimes resort to the former because they’re trying to work their shit out on others.
Here’s what I think: The “pro-life” movement, such as it exists now (more on that below), is naturally attractive for people who themselves suffer from varying degrees of shame, anger, and self-loathing. These are toxic and painful emotions that can be hard to deal with in healthy ways. (They are also deeply human; we all experience them.) It’s much easier, as Brené Brown points out, to project these feelings onto others instead of doing the hard work of naming them and channeling them for redemptive purposes.
For instance, if my life experiences have collectively instilled in me a self-concept of being inherently bad, unlovable, or unworthy, it might be easiest for me to defend myself against my psychological pain by displacing my feelings of shame onto women who seek abortions — or the individuals or organizations who provide it to them.
I can then assure myself: I’m on the side of good and righteousness. They’re on the side of evil and wrong. I stand for virtue; they stand for wickedness.
In psychology, this is called splitting.
See how it works? Not only do I avoid dealing with my own shit by projecting it onto anyone and everyone other than myself; I also avoid any type of vulnerability or discomfort that comes with entering into the messy work of relationship.
After all, there’s no need to connect with others or hear their stories when I’ve already concluded with confidence who I am and who they are. In that case, relationship is utterly unnecessary, and indeed, it’s dangerous, because it might end up disabusing me of the conclusions I’ve already drawn.
Who is that woman walking into the Planned Parenthood clinic? What’s her story? How did her life bring her to where she is now? I don’t actually know, and it doesn’t matter, because I’ve already made a judgment about her in order to feel better about myself. If I actually sat down with her to find out, it might shatter everything I’ve decided to be true. How scary would that be?
If the hypocrisy of the “pro-life” movement is maddening, at least viewed through this lens, it makes some logical sense.
This is why I believe that many are drawn to the modern-day “pro-life” movement as a matter of psychological projection, not necessarily a legitimate moral or ethical objection to the practice of abortion. If members of this movement really found abortion to be the tragedy that they claim it to be, they’d focus first on listening to people and the stories and circumstances that led them to consider getting an abortion.
Then, they’d be doing everything in their power to create a society where women would never even need to entertain such a horrifying option. They’d be fighting to ensure that every mother and child was cared for and given choices and the ability to thrive in life well beyond the womb. They’d stay off of their moral high horses and offer a hand. There are many, many ways they could do exactly that. (I make reference to just a few of them here.)
But this is not what they’re doing — at all. Quite the opposite. Tragically, the statistics reflect as much.
The “pro-life” movement could define itself as one that fights for the dignity and well-being of all human beings — even those who have already been born. It could rebrand itself as a movement focused on listening and helping — getting down in the mud with people — instead of judging, litigating, punishing, and condemning.
To be sure, condemning is much easier than helping. It’s safer, and it’s less messy. But it’s also deeply harmful.
If you subscribe to the “pro-life” movement, you ought to ask yourself: Do you really care about life in all its forms and at all of its stages and circumstances? Do you really want human beings to thrive, even long after they leave their mothers’ wombs? If you do, good for you. Hopefully your movement will someday follow suit, because for now, it does not.
Or, as Brené Brown puts it, are you just trying to work your shit out on others? Are you displacing your own shame on other people — people whose stories might transform you if you bothered to listen to them for even a moment?
If you’ve decided the worst about yourself, there’s a good chance you’ll also assume the worst about others. Or, to put it another way, the things we hate about other people are often actually what we hate about ourselves.
And if you constantly assume the worst about others, the worst is very likely exactly what you’ll see and get from them. We each have the power to honor and dignify or degrade and destroy the humanity of others.
If you choose the latter, you’re part of the problem.
Whenever I weigh in on loaded issues like this one, I realize that I inevitably open myself up to charges of hypocrisy of my own. That comes with the territory. I’m willing to accept it. I’m not above it.
Maybe you’re reading this and asking how I can possibly make presumptions about your motives for being opposed to abortion when I don’t even know you — when there’s a good chance I’ve never met you or had a conversation with you about this topic.
I hear you; it might seem like I’m not practicing what I preach.
There are three points I’d offer in response. First, I’m speaking primarily about the “pro-life” movement as a whole. Second, I’m certainly not saying that everyone who opposes abortion or follows this movement does so as a means of psychological projection; I’m suggesting that many people do. But not everyone. Third, I obviously can’t talk to everyone (or even very many people) about what motivates them on this issue.
If you think I missed you, let me know.
