J-Beibz weighs in on abortion . . . we all go nuts

Justin Beiber recently gave an interview to Rolling Stone magazine.
That is not at all unusual. What is unusual is a few of the questions they asked this almost-17-year-old pop star. He weighed in on everything from health-care to politics to abortion.
Here's the quote that is creating all the noise:

"I really don't believe in abortion," Bieber says. "It's like killing a baby?" How about in cases of rape? "Um. Well, I think that's really sad, but everything happens for a reason. I don't know how that would be a reason. I guess I haven't been in that position, so I wouldn't be able to judge that."

It's not surprising that a teenager raised by a born-again christian mother would be pro-life. It is concerning to those of us who are pro-choice, because of the influence this pop idol has over young people. What's really scary is that, in reference to rape, he says "everything happens for a reason." REALLY?!?!?!
He redeems himself slightly with the caveat that, "I guess I haven't been in that position, so I wouldn't be able to judge that." I'm glad you are able to recognize that, Beiber.

Now, there's not really that much to say about the fact that Justin Beiber is pro-life. At least I don't think so. But we can say quite a bit about our own reactions to the fact.
The Huffington Post found the whole interview mildly amusing, and smoothly glided over Beiber's above quote. Jezebel took a different stance, asking what qualifies Beiber to talk about abortion.

Beiber recognizes, himself, that he isn't in a great position to judge a woman's decision to have an abortion. Jezebel points out that he is an ignorant, 16 year old, male. Why was the Rolling Stone reporter asking him about abortion?

What really struck me was the fact that they picked on his age. What made that impression really stick were some of the comments on the post. Many people agreed that there was no reason to care about the stance of a teenage, male pop-star on abortion. Some even backed up this notion with their personal experience. They said when they were that age, they were pro-life, too, but then they grew up and realized that was wrong.

But that got me thinking. What's wrong with asking how Justin Beiber feels about abortion? How can we say that the opinions of 16 year old boys don't matter, because they are too young, when there are 13 year old girls who can only receive justice by carrying their rapist's baby to term.

Sure, Beiber doesn't have a lot of information on the subject. It probably isn't something he thinks about a whole lot, and I bet no one has really taken the time to discuss it with him in the terms that caused every person on that message board to decide to be pro-choice.

It is absolutely unfair that any woman should have to make that choice, but if that little girl has to live with it, then we can at least expect her male peers to think about it. So let's do that.

Let's start talking to our young, male friends and relatives about why it is important that s woman has a choice.
Explain why, especially in cases of rape, she needs to feel she has control over her body.
Talk about how difficult it is to go through with an unwanted pregnancy. All of the compounding cultural and socio-economic factors. About unreliable birth control and irresponsible partners.

I'd say this is something that should be talked about in schools, during health class along with all of the rest of sexual education. But if we can't even get passed abstinence-only education in some places, this is definitely way too controversial to be allowed.

Oppression by Marilyn Frye

http://www.unbeknownst.org/oppress.htm

I only showed the first page of the article, more is on the website.



I only showed the first page of the article, more is on the website.

That is an incredibly smart article. Sometimes, even seasoned feminists mistake circumstances as falling under oppression and Marilyn Frye here expresses that this is not always the case. She informs that women are oppressed because of the binds and forces that constrain them and that suffering, nearly universal in this day and age, is not the same thing as being oppressed. She beautifully illustrates this example:

If a rich white playboy who lives off income from his investments in South Africa diamond minds should break a leg in a skiing accident at Aspen and wait in pain in a blizzard for hours before he is rescued, we may assume that in that period he suffers. But the suffering comes to an end; his leg is repaired by the best surgeon money can buy and he is soon recuperating in a lavish suite, sipping Chivas Regal. Nothing in this picture suggests a structure of barriers and forces. He is a member of several oppressor groups and does not suddenly become oppressed because he is injured and in pain. Even if the accident was caused by someone's malicious negligence, and hence someone can be blamed for it and morally faulted, that person still has not been an agent of oppression.

She continues to write on how traffic signs, though lame, are not oppressive and how whites are not oppressed by de facto laws prohibiting them from entering black neighborhoods although blacks are for the reverse. It is beautiful, and the main website that links to this article seems to have a pretty fair library for those interested in reading more feminist literature.

If you want to write anything on a link, article, or story, just email WARR (warrosu@gmail.com) the writing or even what you want to be written on and we'll see about doing it. Keep strong, people.

Peace,