... and this will be a short diary, without embedded quotes or images. It's simply an idea that has me worried, and I hope this late-night diary sparks some discussion that might get traction. Stated bluntly, we are all having a great deal of fun jumping on the obvious caveman ideology from Todd Akin, along with all the hypocrisy and wingnut lunacy that has come along with it. I have frankly been drinking it in, and enjoying that wonderful feeling of not being... well... a moron. But as that feeling has faded, I have come to realize that -- almost surely by accident -- Todd Akin has dramatically moved the goal-posts in the American dialogue on abortion rights.
A little more, below the magic rape-pregnancy preventing IUD of freedom...
Lots of people (such as Rachel Maddow) have already noted that the entire Akin controversy has been both a blessing and a curse to the Romney campaign. On one hand, it has brought into stark relief how radical the Republican platform, congress, and candidates truly are on the subject of women's health. They are getting crushed, and are running from the press, the week before their own convention. It's been wondrous to behold. On the other hand, as noted in the awesome Chronicles of Mitt, the entire focus of the media has shifted away from the slow-motion trainwreck that is Romney/Ryan, allowing pesky matters such as missing tax returns to fade from our national three-second attention span.
That is not what this diary is about.
My concern is that, whether by idiocy or genius, Todd Akin -- and all the helpful conservatives who leapt to condemn him -- have shifted the national discussion on a woman's right to choose. (I am not betting on genius, but it does not matter.) Here is how I see it: As of one week ago, the national stance on abortion was that women (or, in many cases, consenting couples) had the right to choose whether or not to terminate a pregnancy. Period. There have been relentless assaults on that right, including proposed bans on late-term abortions, mandated waiting periods, counseling about "fetal pain," the incredibly heinous ultrasound law in Virgnia, etc. Nevertheless, Roe vs. Wade remains the law of the land, it is supported by our president, and attempts to have states vote against abortion rights have failed repeatedly. In the United States, in the reality-based world of reality, women have the right to choose.
Now, however, the frame has shifted. Almost certainly by accident, the comments by Todd Akin have sparked a debate, and that debate has given life to a dangerous underlying precedent. We are no longer talking about abortion rights as a broadly defined and long-standing policy. Instead, we are now all focused on literally the most extreme case possible. We have engaged the most radical right-wing social conservatives on their own turf, and I am worried that we will win the short-term battle but will ultimately lose ground. Now, the national discussion is exclusively focused on whether we could maybe -- pretty please? -- still consider abortion as an option in the case of rape. And even though conservatives immediately jumped to condemn the comments by Akin, we are now seeing the debate taking place. As a nation, in the media, and on this website, we are talking and talking about rape-induced pregnancy, states that afford rapists the rights to visit their babies, etc. And, to its credit, the nation and the media seem to be holding strong: We do not believe that women should be required to carry their rape-babies to term. So there, Rick Santorum! Suck it!
The problem is that, once we engage in debating the most extreme scenario, it changes the national perception of the entire underlying topic. We are trying to get the most extreme hard-right fundamentalists to agree that -- just maybe -- in cases of rape, it might be okay to consider the "a word." And, by doing so, they are going to win the bigger battle. Think about it: After this long discussion about rape victims and their maybe-if-they're-lucky rights to exercise freedom of choice, how is your average American (or state legislator) going to feel about the plight of a young woman who simply is not ready to be a mom? Or a middle-aged woman who did not think she could get pregnant again? Or any of the other 99% of women who, for whatever personal reasons, want to exercise their legally protected right to choose? Well, by allowing the abortion debate to shift to the most extreme case, we have largely surrendered the debate on "everyday abortion."
My worry is that, once all this is over and the news cycle has moved on, the national criterion will have shifted. We are no longer having discussions of "choice versus not." We are now arguing that at least our rape victims should still have a teeny shred of their rights. This is how arguments are lost in the long run.
Any good car salesman knows the trick -- get the customer to reject something silly, and you can sell them your basic sedan. "Hey! You look like a guy who likes driving fast and attracting the ladies! Here's a sports car that's almost illegal, and it can be yours for $195,000! Oh, come on, just sit behind the wheel..." After playing along, the customer finally says "No, I cannot possibly get this car," and the salesman says, "Well, let's take a look at our newest four-door model..." Many studies have shown that once people are forced to reject an excessive demand, they are more likely to accept a more reasonable demand, even if they would never have agreed to it in the first place.
We should not be talking to the salesman about $195,000 sports cars. We should be holding the line about what we want, and what it will cost. We should not be encouraging a national debate about whether or not rape victims should have the right to self-determination. We should be holding the line that ALL the endless attacks on women's rights are outrageous, and that Todd Akin's comments are merely a minor symptom of a much bigger problem with the rise of the religious right.
I hope this diary will resonate with some readers, and that we can help shift the debate back to the rights of all women. Rape victims should have freedom of choice, but so should every other woman whose rights have been under constant attack for decades. Don't give a fucking inch.