social movement tactics and the komen/planned parenthood dispute
Question: The Komen incident is an example of a movement working “around the edges.” Pro-life activists are pursuing their goals by increasing the cost of getting an abortion by having a non-profit yank funding for an organization that provides abortion counseling and services. What evidence do we have that pro-choice activists are pursing a similar policy? Have organizations been pressured into increasing abortion services by pro-choice activists? If not, why is the pro-choice movement passive in this respect? Input from experts on this movement are welcome.
Adverts: From Black Power/Grad Skool Rulz
Written by fabiorojas
February 5, 2012 at 5:22 am
Posted in fabio, social movements, strategy
5 Responses
Subscribe to comments with RSS.
Comments are closed.
If I may add a question: is there comparative work that explains in detail what makes the US so different from Europe with respect to breast cancer activism? (The same question could apply to the abortion policy bit.)
Fr.
February 6, 2012 at 9:42 am
Fr.: You want to ask Patricia Strach. (http://www.albany.edu/rockefeller/faculty_joint_strach.shtml)
fabiorojas
February 6, 2012 at 5:00 pm
I’m certainly not an expert, but I’d like to take a stab at this anyway. It seems to me that perhaps the tactics that the pro-choice movement does pursue are somewhat “around the edges.” Pro-choice activists ultimately have a similarish end goal as their anti-abortion (gosh, Fabio. Don’t give in in this rhetoric war, we’re all pro-life!) foes, which is to reduce the incidence of unplanned or unwanted pregnancies. Pro-choice activists don’t simply advocate for abortion services (although of course that is a part of the movement), they lobby for sexual health education, increased availability of contraception, etc. In other words, the pro-choice movement doesn’t aim to increase abortions, but rather improve access to all reproductive health resources. I doubt that organizations are being pressured to increase abortion services, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they are encouraged to, say, keep a jar of condoms handy.
Anonymous
February 6, 2012 at 6:19 pm
The side that’s losing has a greater incentive to build institutional inroads.
What’s really interesting in this last conflict is how quickly Komen folded in response to the threat of pressure from possible runners and funders.
http://politicsoutdoors.com/2012/02/05/a-protest-is-a-threat-the-komen-debacle/
It’s not always government policy that is the easiest get for a movement. Nikki Raeburn’s book on corporate benefits for gays and lesbians is a great look at how to build institutional acceptance beneath the radar of national politics.
(I think escaping detection is pretty much impossible on abortion politics these days.)
David S. Meyer
February 6, 2012 at 6:20 pm
Fabio: thanks! I was also very interested in Patricia Strach’s paper on higher education policy design.
Fr.
February 6, 2012 at 11:32 pm