www.newsandletters.org
|
|
NEWS & LETTERS, May 2002
'Policing motherhood'
Chicago—I attended a workshop
entitled "Policing Motherhood" at The Color of Violence Conference in
March. The four panelists greatly expanded the concept of reproductive freedom
and engaged in serious dialogue with the audience about whether or not to fight
to broaden the mainstream abortion rights movement, or to form their own
movement, reflective of the concerns of women of color. The speakers considered the
following to be issues of reproductive freedom: welfare reform, medically
harmful public and private birth control incentives, incarceration and
immigration policies that separate families; poverty and limited economic means
to raise children; environmental racism and lack of prenatal care; the need for
access to abortion; and, the protection of women from sexually transmitted
diseases. Toni Bond explained that this
panel was necessary for an uncompromising and inclusive movement for
reproductive freedom and health to be built. She said that while many white
women fight for abortion rights, Black women and others fight for access to
abortion and the right to have children—healthy children—free from economic
constraints and population control measures. Because much of the mainstream
reproductive freedom movement has been so narrowly focused on abortion rights,
"compromises" that have sold out women of color, the poor, and the
young have often come easily. In fact, one member of the audience reminded
people of the alliance between population control proponents and abortion rights
activists in the 1990s. Jael Silliman, one of the
speakers, addressed this saying, "Women of color have fought like hell to
change the debate around population issues." She asked, "Who is the
biggest violator of the environment? Is it women of color around the
globe?" Of course the answer is no. So, she asked, why is it that women's
fertility is controlled in the name of preventing a drain on the national
resources and economy? Jael was the first to raise the
issue of whether or not women of color's energy should be used to try to
transform the predominantly white reproductive freedom movement. She said,
"Instead of fighting the mainstream, why don't we go where race is
naturally at the center of struggle." It was clear that she, along with so
many of the women in the room, had been hurt by racism within the reproductive
health/freedom movement. It was also exciting and inspiring to witness women of
color deciding whether, and how, to create their own radical perspectives and
space. What I worry about is what
Cherrie Moraga raised in the opening plenary session the day before this
workshop when she talked about the nationalist movements of the '60s and '70s
where women were told to produce soldiers for the revolution. What I've learned
from women of color liberatory movements is that often times, when race is
"naturally at the center," it has "naturally" been equated
to male freedom. It seems like women of color are on their own. We are all in need of the
perspectives that were being developed in this workshop because they deal with
what freedom is about in the here and now and how to fight for it. We've been
losing the battle for years, and this workshop offered a way forward for women
and all of humanity. —Sonia Bergonzi |
|
Home l News & Letters Newspaper l Back issues l News and Letters Committees l Dialogues l Raya Dunayevskaya l Contact us l Search Published by News and Letters Committees |
