See that picture down there? Not a very good picture, but that’s not the point. The point is only to show a sign near the Los Angeles airport.
I like the sign. “Why?” you ask. I like the free and unblushing use of “abortion.” All of my life, I have heard “choice,” “reproductive rights,” etc. I chafed at euphemisms starting when I was about ten. I’m not even crazy about “pro-life.” I think people should name the thing they’re talking about — e.g., abortion.
Over the years, I have most frequently called myself “anti-abortion,” liking the piquancy of the phrase. Its sharpness. “Pro-life” seems to me . . . a little fuzzy and evasive.
“Choice” is one of the great lexical triumphs of modern times. When abortion-rights advocates hit on “pro-choice,” they struck gold. “Choice” is such a good word, a good concept. And when people talk about “choice,” you know they’re not talking about schools or health-care plans. They’re talking about abortion.
“NARAL” stood for “National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws.” That was pre-Roe. Post-Roe, “NARAL” stood for “National Abortion Rights Action League.” Later on — 2003 — the organization christened itself “NARAL Pro-Choice America.”
They can call themselves a ham sandwich, they’re still an abortion-rights group. And, post-Dobbs, will “NARAL” once more stand for “National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws”?
For many years, the leader of NARAL was Kate Michelman. I have a memory of her, on television. This was eons ago. Probably the show was Crossfire, which I watched religiously in the ’80s. I’m going from memory, but I will be pretty close to a transcript.
Michelman was debating a pro-lifer (!), who opened with a statement about the “mother” and her “baby.” When it was Michelman’s turn, she said, “First, let’s get the language straight. It’s not a ‘mother,’ it’s a ‘woman.’ It’s not a ‘baby,’ it’s a ‘fetus.’”
Yes, get the language straight. That is so important — so meaningful — in any number of arenas.