{"id":1357,"date":"2024-03-25T11:26:43","date_gmt":"2024-03-25T15:26:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/in-print\/the-inadequacy-of-objectivity-for-a-feminist-movement-how-the-pro-choice-movement-failed-women-of-color-and-its-own-agenda\/"},"modified":"2025-05-12T11:12:06","modified_gmt":"2025-05-12T15:12:06","slug":"the-inadequacy-of-objectivity-for-a-feminist-movement-how-the-pro-choice-movement-failed-women-of-color-and-its-own-agenda","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/in-print\/volume-36-issue-4-fall-2023\/the-inadequacy-of-objectivity-for-a-feminist-movement-how-the-pro-choice-movement-failed-women-of-color-and-its-own-agenda\/","title":{"rendered":"The Inadequacy of Objectivity for a Feminist Movement: How the Pro-Choice Movement Failed Women of Color and Its Own Agenda"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Objectivity, as a virtue and methodology, has been touted as the gold-standard for sound reasoning and argumentation, particularly in the legal domain. Because objectivity, as Catharine MacKinnon describes, can be interpreted as a neutralized description of the male point of view, this valuation has created a false binary which positions male subjectivity as authoritative, and female subjectivity as incredulous.1 This Note seeks to explore the ways in which this binary has influenced pro-choice and anti-abortion rhetoric\u2014an area which, especially in the pro-choice camp, has been particularly shaped by female voices. Specifically, I argue that the mainstream feminist abortion-rights movement, in consistently appealing to neutral arguments and insisting on a single, universalized voice, has responded to anti-abortion advocates\u2019 use of emotionally salient rhetoric in ways that reflect and reinforce the false binary, undermining all women. The result has been a shallow movement that excludes women of color and, as such, embraces a misguided feminist vision.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/24\/2024\/03\/GT-GJLE230028.pdf\">Keep Reading<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Objectivity, as a virtue and methodology, has been touted as the gold-standard for sound reasoning and argumentation, particularly in the legal domain. Because objectivity, as Catharine MacKinnon describes, can be [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":10169,"featured_media":0,"parent":1368,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"abstract.php","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_price":"","_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_header":"","_tribe_default_ticket_provider":"","_tribe_ticket_capacity":"0","_ticket_start_date":"","_ticket_end_date":"","_tribe_ticket_show_description":"","_tribe_ticket_show_not_going":false,"_tribe_ticket_use_global_stock":"","_tribe_ticket_global_stock_level":"","_global_stock_mode":"","_global_stock_cap":"","_tribe_rsvp_for_event":"","_tribe_ticket_going_count":"","_tribe_ticket_not_going_count":"","_tribe_tickets_list":"[]","_tribe_ticket_has_attendee_info_fields":false,"footnotes":"","_tec_slr_enabled":"","_tec_slr_layout":""},"class_list":["post-1357","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"ticketed":false,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1357","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/10169"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1357"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1357\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1379,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1357\/revisions\/1379"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/1368"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.law.georgetown.edu\/legal-ethics-journal\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1357"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}