History of Feminism
Related: About this forumI've been trying to wrap my head around opposition to abortion and women's reproductive rights...
In terms of the historical and sociological context for what drives the anti-choice crowd.
So far, I've been thinking about the relationship between property rights and their historical origins (particularly in the English common law, the Roman law, etc. - along with the Greek slave societies, where women also had the status of being male property - and opposition to abortion.
In doing some basic research on this relationship, I found this:
Further exacerbating the situation, rights normally enjoyed by women were often withdrawn when she married. Indeed, a woman gave up so many civil and property rights upon crossing the threshold that she was said to be entering a state of "civil death." This unhappy circumstance arose partially because American (and Indiana) law was based upon English common law. Predicated on "precedent and fixed principles," common law had dictated a subordinate position for women. Married women generally were not allowed to make contracts, devise wills, take part in other legal transactions, or control any wages they might earn. One of the few legal advantages of marriage for a woman was that her husband was obligated to support her and be responsible for her debts. It is highly doubtful that these latter provisions outweighed the lack of other rights, particularly in the area women faced the most severe restriction, property rights.
https://www.connerprairie.org/Education-Research/Indiana-History-1800-1860/Women-and-the-Law-in-Early-19th-Century
Doing some more research on the doctrine of coverture, I also found this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coverture#Principle_of_coverture
Married women had no rights to their bodies. That meant that not only would a husband have a claim to any wages generated by his wifes labor or to the fruits of her body (her children), but he also had an absolute right to sexual access. Within marriage, a wifes consent was implied, so under the law, all sex-related activity, including rape, was legitimate. His total mastery of this fellow human being stopped short, but just short, of death. Of course, a man wasnt allowed to beat his wife to death, but he could beat her.
https://www.nwhm.org/blog/coverture-the-word-you-probably-don%E2%80%99t-know-but-should/
How much of the opposition to abortion in the United States comes from the cultural, economic, social, political, and legal legacy of coverture (and likewise, similar legal systems around the world)? I strongly suspect that it has something to do with it.
Women as the property of their husbands - that's the kind of historical reality and legacy we are dealing with here.
shenmue
(38,538 posts)That's where this strain of thinking comes from.
ismnotwasm
(42,486 posts)The roots go deep indeed
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/women/long.html
Starry Messenger
(32,375 posts)By virtue of the directing roles played by men in large-scale agriculture, irrigation and construction projects, as well as in stock raising, this surplus wealth was gradually appropriated by a hierarchy of men as their private property. This, in turn, required the institution of marriage and the family to fix the legal ownership and inheritance of a mans property. Through monogamous marriage the wife was brought under the complete control of her husband who was thereby assured of legitimate sons to inherit his wealth.
As men took over most of the activities of social production, and with the rise of the family institution, women became relegated to the home to serve their husbands and families. The state apparatus came into existence to fortify and legalize the institutions of private property, male dominion and the father-family, which later were sanctified by religion.
This, briefly, is the Marxist approach to the origins of womans oppression. Her subordination did not come about through any biological deficiency as a sex. It was the result of the revolutionary social changes which destroyed the equalitarian society of the matriarchal gens or clan and replaced it with a patriarchal class society which, from its birth, was stamped with discriminations and inequalities of many kinds, including the inequality of the sexes. The growth of this inherently oppressive type of socio-economic organization was responsible for the historic downfall of women.
It's the basis of capitalist exploitation, which is what makes me o.O when so called "socialists" call things like abortion rights some kind of desert-topping that doesn't matter next to class. Class oppression was a replication and expansion of one of the original oppressions.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Response to Starry Messenger (Reply #3)
Post removed
Starry Messenger
(32,375 posts)Zamen
(116 posts)Starry Messenger
(32,375 posts)"it's usually the woman nagging her man to marry her"
I posted a link, of which you didn't address any of the points therein. I gave your "argument" all of the attention it deserved.
Orrex
(64,431 posts)Though I'm sure that it would have been enlightened and progressive.
Starry Messenger
(32,375 posts)Pity we'll miss it.
Orrex
(64,431 posts)She's fallen waaaaaaaay behind in her nagging, which I infer is the function of the uterus or something.
Starry Messenger
(32,375 posts)It's how we do!
boston bean
(36,534 posts)on a side note, this is why it's so damned hard to trace back your female ancestors when doing genealogy.
I've hit a brick wall with one line and I don't think I will ever break through it!