Sex, the Media and the Future

So we are gearing up for another exciting and heated campaign season, and there is no doubt in my mind that Planned Parenthood will play a role, whether as lighting rod or as a supporter of a candidate. Before he “suspended” his campaign, Herman Cain made the organization part of his campaign strategy (if he in fact, had one).

Responding to these false attacks constitutes a major part of Julie Mickelberry’s job, but she deals on a regional level. I talked to Julie Mickelberry, Director of Public Affairs for Planned Parenthood Gulf Coast, about her perceptions of the current state of the organization in these challenging times. We discussed the current political atmosphere, locally and nationally, and the 24/7 media that she must navigate. She also offered advice for young women interested in politics.

The media affects women’s reproductive rights and views of sexuality in two major ways: changing sexual norms and the ability of advances in media technology to hamper or to aid the reproductive rights movement.

Commentators and scholars claim that the negative influences of the media sexualize and demean girls at younger and younger ages. Sexist imagery and advertisements not only intensifies girls’ body issues, but also contributes to girls developing poor self esteem and unhealthy views of sex. In 2007 the American Psychological Association released a revealing, and disheartening study, Report of the Task Force on the Sexualization of Girls,on the negative effects  of the overly sexualized and objectified portrayal of women in the media on young girls. The task force stated that across all forms of media (video games, newspapers, magazines, TVs, etc.) advertisements and programs sexualize and objectify women much more often than men. Psychologists contend that these portrayals have a variety of negative effects on young girls who are developing their own sense of self. One of these facets is how it affects girls’ sexuality and views of sex. The authors of the report claim that when girls “self-objectify” their sexual health decreases on several factors including a lack of sexual assertiveness (i.e. an ability to say no and insistence on condom use). Idealized and unrealistic images of women in the media may lead to girls developing low self-images which can be directly connected to a lack of sexual assertiveness.

Below is the trailer of Cover Girl Culture which looks into the way the fashion industry feeds into girls’ low self-esteem:

Julie Mickelberry says that the explosion of social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter has its benefits and detriments. She claim that the net gain of social media is positive because  it allows Planned Parenthood to reach out to and stay in contact with supporters. The House Republican effort to defund Planned Parenthood this past session tested the organization’s tech savvy as it relied heavily on sites such as Twitter and Facebook to educate the population about what the organization’s record. Advances in media is a two-side sword as anti-choice activists utilize these new technologies to attack Planned Parenthood, and the organization finds itself fighting back to set the record straight using these same sources.

Julie discussed in length the current political atmosphere and its effect on women’s health. In 2008 President Obama’s electoral victory along with a majority in the House and Senate let hope ripple through the women’s reproductive rights movement for the opportunity to be pro-active rather than reactive. She mentioned a few legislative victories including the repeal of the Global Gag Rule and the Affordable Care Act (with a few major flaws- my words not hers). The 2010 midterm elections rewrote the landscape for reproductive rights and required Planned Parenthood and other like-minded organizations to play defensive once again. This past session in D.C. saw attempts to defund Planned Parenthood and repeal Title X funding. This trend plays out even more dramatically in the states. Despite Mississippi resoundingly recently rejecting Personhood to their state Constitution, a Democrat and Republican in Georgia proposed their own Personhood law in the Georgia State House and Senate.

The most important lesson here for college graduates looking to enter the realm of politics and/or the media, is to realize what you’re getting into. Ms Mickelberry offered some wise advice:

“Be prepared for a fast-paced work environment that is rewarding and at times stressful. Volunteer for a political campaign; this will give you a glimpse into the political world and illustrates the importance of messaging and building relationships with key stakeholders.”

Theory Meets Practice

Ideals may work beautifully on paper, but this actuality does not usually exist. Organizations may also state goals or mission statements that do not necessarily correspond with their actions. Theory stands as an invaluable tool and as a solid infrastructure, but theory often fails to take into account for reality.

The politics surrounding reproductive rights continues to evolve and become increasingly controversial. The issue becomes even more complex when gender, race, and class intersect. As a result of third-wave feminism, the feminist attack on the pro-choice movement has been, at times, scathing but necessary. In her article, “Beyond Pro-Choice versus Pro-Life: Women of Color and Reproductive Justice”, Andrea Smith discusses some of the hypocrisy and elitism that shaped the early reproductive rights movement, especially the early history of Planned Parenthood. Smith’s ammunition for her criticism of Planned Parenthood is dated. She cites a Planned Parenthood study completed in 1960 as proof of racist and classist ideology, yet that rhetoric reflects much of the racism of the day by presuming that poor women did not possess the intellect to control their own fertility. Here is more information on Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood’s origins (compiled by Planned Parenthood). Anti-choice activists distort many of the negative claims directed against Margaret Sanger, and these falsehoods are repeated by even pro-choice activists. While some of Margaret Sanger’s views are worrisome and outdated, the level of demonetization does not equate. Andrea Smith focuses her criticism on  Planned Parenthood policies over half a century old, because the organization’s current polices and leaders have worked diligently to expand not only choice, but also accessibility and affordability.

Smith also attacks the current premise of the legal paradigm surrounding reproductive rights and choice in the United States. She claims that NARAL’s and Planned Parenthood’s embrace of the right to privacy enshrined in Roe v. Wade discriminates against underprivileged women, predominantly women of color, especially Native Americans, who rely on federal healthcare which prohibits funding of abortion. Advocates in the 1970s needed to choose the course and argument they believed most likely to be accepted and upheld by the Supreme Court. The current political atmosphere requires compromises. The passage of the Hyde Amendment (which banned federal funding for abortion) struck a blow to the pro-choice movement, but one without the Freedom of Choice Act could not have passed. The lack of federal funding for abortion remains one of the greatest reproductive rights injustices in this country. Women of lower socio-economic class do not face the same availability of choices available to wealthier women, and and the Hyde Amendment discriminated against them. But the U.S. Congress would not have passed any legislation that would have funded abortion.  Advocates viewed achieving the legal right to have an abortion as the first step, and access and affordability follows suit. Politics is a game of compromise, and sacrifices need to be made to allow forward progress.

Congressman Henry Hyde of Illinois discusses how he came to sponsor the now infamous 1979 “Hyde Amendment”:

Jessica Arons discusses the implications of the Hyde Amendment, especially for poor women and women of color:

Planned Parenthood works on with many of the same political issues of reproduction discussed in the anthropologists Faye Ginsburg and Rayna Rapp’s article, the “Politics of Reproduction.” A relevant point discussed by Ginsburg and Rapp once again delves into the question of eugenics. They question the role of abortions for fetuses diagnosed with disabilities, and raised additional moral questions. To what extent are women going to be able to control their own bodies? The larger questions deals with whose rights are prioritized: a woman or a fetus or embryo? Despite the flaws of the individualist and the right to privacy approaches adjudicated by the Supreme Court, women are currently capable (at least legally) of controlling their own bodies.

A little over a decade after the groundbreaking decision Roe v. Wade (1973), Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg wrote an essay entitled, “Some Thoughts on Autonomy and Equality in Relation to Roe V. Wade.” Justice Ginsburg discussed different aspects of the reproductive rights movement and the precedent created by the monumental decision. She wrote that the decision injured the reproductive rights movement because of the legal precedent it developed – that is that the right to privacy and the emphasis of “medically approved autonomy.” Ginsburg argued for an emphasis on a constitutional argument for equality between the sexes. She agreed with Smith’s point that the individualist legal argument sacrificed women of lower economic class and places abortion as a “negative right” – it does not allow an action (i.e. banning abortion) rather than guaranteeing a right (such as access to safe and affordable abortion). She contends that the breadth of the argument of Roe v. Wade and its very ambiguity caused some of the kulturkampf that currently defines the abortion and choice debate.

I  disagree with Justice Ginsburg’s argument. While I agree that a constitutional gender equality argument in Roe v. Wade rather  may have strengthened reproductive and women’s rights. I do not believe that the legal paradigm determined by Roe v. Wade added or created the controversy attached to the abortion debate. The visceral nature of the debate is not one based in differing legal or constitutionality questions, but more on the moral and ethical issues, marked by dogmatic opinions rather  than a logical conversation.