Kathleen Wynne’s recent victory of the Ontario premiership has been rightly hailed as a triumph for women in politics. Considering that women now lead half of Canada’s provinces, it is tempting to imagine that gender parity has finally been achieved. However, Conservative backbenchers continue to wage a subtle war against women that threatens to devastate their hard-fought gains.
Conservative mp Mark Warawa’s upcoming motion to condemn sex-selective abortion is the cleverest of recent Tory attempts to slowly erode the right to choose.
The proponents of the legislation argue that some men are pressuring their wives into aborting female fetuses. If women are being forced into such abortions, the argument runs, should the state not afford them protection? After all, how can we pretend to have achieved gender equality while women are being forced into aborting female fetuses?
Warawa has stated that he fully expects the opposition to back his motion. “Who,” he asks, “could not condemn discrimination against women and girls?” That question is devastatingly effective, and Warawa knows it. Ingeniously, he has somehow managed to position his anti-abortion motion as pro-women.
However, close scrutiny reveals that Warawa’s motion is not nearly as benign as its proponents would have the public believe.
It is sadly true that some men force their wives into seeking sex-selective abortions. However, it would be naïve to assume that there are no other circumstances in which a man might pressure a woman to terminate her pregnancy. Young fathers or men with financial concerns might also try to convince their pregnant partners to visit the abortion clinic.
While this reality is unfortunate, the fact remains that we cannot legislate against women seeking abortions under male pressure. If we did, we’d have to take abortion off the table altogether — which, I suspect, is Mr. Warawa’s end goal.
Many will be convinced by the argument that it is wrong to abort a fetus purely on the basis of its gender. This reasoning is indeed compelling, but comes with its own problems.
To attribute “womanhood” to a fetus comes dangerously close to granting it “personhood.” If the motion stands, the anti-abortion community will certainly claim that if we can protect some fetuses because they are female, we should protect all of them because they are all human. To that argument, there is no easy answer.
Warawa’s motion is clearly a wolf in sheep’s clothing. If it is allowed to pass, its implications will allow the pro-life community to threaten the right to choice.
The issue of sex-selective abortion is undeniably complex. All women, feminists included, are justifiably uncomfortable with the notion that a woman might seek to abort a fetus purely on the basis of its gender.
However it may pain us, we must swallow that discomfort. The right to choose is so absolutely fundamental to women’s self-autonomy, gender parity, and quality of life that we must accept it fully in spite of its complexities. If women hope to continue their recent string of successes, they must stand up for their rights yet again. In the words of Nellie McClung, “Never retreat, never explain, never apologize — get the thing done and let them howl.”
Devyn Noonan is Women’s Issues Director for the U of T Liberals.
