抵制和挪用

F. Amery
{"title":"抵制和挪用","authors":"F. Amery","doi":"10.1332/policypress/9781529204995.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter assesses abortion debates in the 1980s and 1990s. By this point, anti-abortion actors were attempting to solve their PR problem by mimicking their opponents’ arguments, moving away from a conservative emphasis on morality and vice, and towards an appropriation of the liberal-paternalist and feminist arguments that had been put forward in support of legal abortion. This was done by adopting seemingly feminist language in talking about medical power, exploitation and women’s rights. Pro-choice and feminist actors, on the other hand, typically avoided challenging the logics underpinning the Abortion Act. Few alternatives to the current, highly medicalised system of abortion provision were proffered; rather, pro-choice actors were forced into a reactive position defending the Abortion Act from anti-abortion attacks.","PeriodicalId":405787,"journal":{"name":"Beyond Pro-life and Pro-choice","volume":"38 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Backlash and Appropriation\",\"authors\":\"F. Amery\",\"doi\":\"10.1332/policypress/9781529204995.003.0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter assesses abortion debates in the 1980s and 1990s. By this point, anti-abortion actors were attempting to solve their PR problem by mimicking their opponents’ arguments, moving away from a conservative emphasis on morality and vice, and towards an appropriation of the liberal-paternalist and feminist arguments that had been put forward in support of legal abortion. This was done by adopting seemingly feminist language in talking about medical power, exploitation and women’s rights. Pro-choice and feminist actors, on the other hand, typically avoided challenging the logics underpinning the Abortion Act. Few alternatives to the current, highly medicalised system of abortion provision were proffered; rather, pro-choice actors were forced into a reactive position defending the Abortion Act from anti-abortion attacks.\",\"PeriodicalId\":405787,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Beyond Pro-life and Pro-choice\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Beyond Pro-life and Pro-choice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781529204995.003.0005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Beyond Pro-life and Pro-choice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/policypress/9781529204995.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章评估了20世纪80年代和90年代关于堕胎的辩论。在这一点上,反堕胎的演员试图通过模仿对手的论点来解决他们的公关问题,从强调道德和罪恶的保守主义转向挪用支持合法堕胎的自由家长主义和女权主义的论点。这是通过在谈论医疗权力、剥削和妇女权利时采用看似女权主义的语言来实现的。另一方面,支持堕胎和女权主义的演员通常避免挑战支持《堕胎法》的逻辑。除了目前高度医疗化的堕胎制度之外,几乎没有其他选择;相反,支持堕胎的演员被迫处于被动地位,捍卫《堕胎法》免受反堕胎的攻击。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Backlash and Appropriation
This chapter assesses abortion debates in the 1980s and 1990s. By this point, anti-abortion actors were attempting to solve their PR problem by mimicking their opponents’ arguments, moving away from a conservative emphasis on morality and vice, and towards an appropriation of the liberal-paternalist and feminist arguments that had been put forward in support of legal abortion. This was done by adopting seemingly feminist language in talking about medical power, exploitation and women’s rights. Pro-choice and feminist actors, on the other hand, typically avoided challenging the logics underpinning the Abortion Act. Few alternatives to the current, highly medicalised system of abortion provision were proffered; rather, pro-choice actors were forced into a reactive position defending the Abortion Act from anti-abortion attacks.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信