Feminists fight like girls when it comes to sex-selective abortion
From Brother Ivo:
Let us not kid one another. Although the approach of the DPP toward sex-selective abortion is equally applicable to boys or girls - and to the gay or transgendered too, in the unlikely event of a genetic component being identified - the vast majority of the children butchered and sent down the sluice will be little girls.
There may be a handful of radical feminists who would reject a male child, but it is the values of several significant ethnic or religiously-defined cultures which will be driving the decisions of the majority of those seeking sex-selected terminations, and within those cultures, the girl child is regarded as of distinctly lesser value.
Under such value systems, girls need not be educated; they need to be covered; they present a constant threat to one's honour by their weakness, ignorance, or loose morals; and they cost more than boys because you have to pay a dowry to get them off your hands. Who needs a fourth?
Could there be anything more offensive to Feminism? Is there anything that confronts its declared assertion of indistinguishable existential equality greater than the notion that a child's potential may be calmly snuffed out as soon as the female sex is discovered, for it affronts one's expectation?
By making sex-selective abortion routinely possible, the decision will make mothers within male-dominated communities more vulnerable to male bullying, and less empowered to protect the baby toward whom they may harbour perfectly ordinary maternal feelings and acceptance. That, however, is not enough: such mothers live within cultures which are alien and impenetrable to the progressive mind which gave rise to Feminism. Those cultures are antithetical to its ideals, yet our feminists seem content to make common cause with their ideological opponents.
Brother Ivo has had the benefit of a wide and varied circle of friends and associates from which he has learnt much. He vividly recalls a friend from one of those communities as he patiently explained that those outside his culture can never fully appreciate the power structure. He explained that even he, a professional of 40 years, a sophisticated British-educated man of independent means, was utterly unable to act against the will of his father and that would remain the case until his father died. That is a real Patriarchy.
Only when the power of that cultural influence is understood does the full impact of the DPP's misjudgement come into focus, and with it the appalling betrayal of their cause by the silence of British feminists.
Within the communities where sex selection will largely take place, an assertion of "the woman's right to choose" is, frankly, risible. Those who cannot choose what they wear, where they go, what they believe, or whom they may meet or even marry, are not going to afforded the freedom to choose what to do with their own bodies. A significant number could testify to this by referring to their own genital mutilation - another instance where the DPP and Britain's progressives have signally failed to use the law and to apply it to the protection of the truly vulnerable.
What we shall have is pressure on mothers applied deep within these communities. Physical abuse may occur, but its implied threat will probably be enough. The mere contemplation of the consequences of non-compliance may induce enough stress to meet whatever criteria may be prescribed as sufficient, be they devised by the DPP or the BMA.
Regardless of how high the bar may be set, one may be assured that some, within such communities or outside, will always be happy to sign away lives in return for a ready supply of patients seeking the service.
The women will not come as confident or free-minded, but as supplicants to a second patriarchal system, for most of the doctors benefitting and judging will be men. Their say so is needed, but the process will have started with the husbands, fathers and other male members of the community who set these standards.
This, we are to believe, 'empowers' women.
Those who protest the inequalities within the House of Bishops, those who are affronted by Miss World contests or all-male Morris Dancing sides, have become supine and contemptible on this issue. Where is their outrage at this casual downgrading of equality? Where is their assertion of sisterly support to mothers and girl children alike? Who amongst them is saying that these value judgments are simply offensive to our Western notions of equality?
When those of the mindset of the Taliban reflect upon this and hear Britain's feminists agreeing that femaleness can indeed be regarded as reasonably inducing emotional angst and mental illness, they surely will welcome the support of such women who are now explicitly agreeing with them that femaleness in a child can be distasteful, disappointing, an unnecessary drain on the family, and so best avoided.
This is utterly intellectually absurd, but it will keep the real misogynists happy.
British feminists may talk a good fight - but when it comes down to it, they fight like girls.
Brother Ivo is the Patron Saint of Lawyers