![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
What are other feminists think about so-called pro-life feminism? This position is lacking in the article! -- till we ☼☽ | Talk 14:35, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
I removed most of a long commentary on Roman Catholic "New Feminism." It gives the impression that prolife feminists are all Roman Catholics, and Catholics who accept official doctrine at that. Not so.--M.
I removed this biased, non-NPOV, non-sourced commentary:
This comment does not have one source listed on who said these things, when they were said, etc. It is the commentary of a Wikipedian, and as such, it is non-NPOV and must be removed. I will keep removing it too if a source, or citation, is not provided. -- Keetoowah 18:53, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
There was a citation, and you removed it. There was a citation to an essay in The Nation presenting exactly that opinion. It is not non-NPOV to present the existence of dissenting opinions. I am restoring it, because your criticism is unfounded. -- Soultaco 20:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
I cleaned up the criticism section and set it off from the main blob of text, but there is a problem: The pro life response to the criticism is full of logical errors:
-- Zaorish 19:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, I didn't write that, but I think I might know what the user meant in regards to the "tool for profit" concept. I have read pro-life feminist material that points to the profits groups like Planned Parenthood receive as an example of their true goals. I think that one at least, is valid to place under the counter arguments.
But overall, I don't think three lines suffices as a response to criticism. That part needs to be expanded with some more detail, or deleted altogether, as I see it.-- GenkiDama 21:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
(undent) The "Feminism and Non-Violence Studies Association" is not an organization. It is the brainchild of Rachel MacNair, president of Feminists for Life for 10 years. The "organization" published a grand total of five newsletters and one "online book" that reads like an essay. The last time MacNair published anything through FNSA was seven years ago, in 2000. All of the people listed above as members of Feminists for Life are involved with this "association".
Angela Kennedy's book is a collection of nine essays. The two of those which focus on pro-life feminism in terms of abortion are written by MacNair and Krane Derr. Grenier Sweet doesn't even mention feminism on her website. It's the same voices, over and over.
The views of a vocal minority should not be inflated to look as though it's a social movement, then given a platform through Wikipedia to espouse their views. Joie de Vivre 22:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
(undent) WP:Crystal. It's not appropriate to speculate on the relevance of a philosophy that has not gained momentum or visibility in a movement. If the best evidence of any such movement is a single organization, a couple of books written by members of that organization, and a short-lived writing club founded by the president of the organization, we do not have a discrete movement here beyond the organization. Joie de Vivre 17:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, As the actual editor of “Swimming Against the Tide: Feminist Dissent on the issue of Abortion”, and with the book/contributors notes in front of me, I can tell you the following:
Two contributors are North American members of the FNSA, co-authors of ‘Pro-life Feminism: Yesterday and Today, and have had past affiliations with Feminists for Life. One other author is a British member of the FNSA.
One contributor was active in the British Groups Feminists Against Eugenics and Women for Life.
Two contributors were active in the British socialist pro-life Group the Labour Life Group, one as Women’s Officer.
One contributor is a founder member of the group Feminists for Life of Ireland.
Four contributors are unaffiliated to any group as such, but identified as pro-life feminists.
The foreword was written by Mary McAleese, some months before she became President of Ireland.
All contributors were critiquing abortion from a feminist perspective, hence the title of the book! Contrary to Joie de Vivre’s assertion, they were ALL focusing on pro-life feminism in terms of abortion (although other life issues are also present in the book).
I think this provides good evidence that there is a pro-life feminist movement, especially if added to the Grenier Sweet multi-author anthology. There are what I would call many other examples of pro-life feminist activity. There’s even a pro-life feminist Yahoo Group!
But I think the denial of there being a ‘movement’ here in the first place is odd. There are many grass-roots movements for justice all around the world: there does not need to have been a multitude of literature to ‘prove’ that a movement exists (especially if movements are not necessarily highly literary as such) . I can also tell you I get quite regular emails/letters from women (more often younger women) who have come across the book and find they share the concerns expressed within. Obviously this is just anecdote on my part- but the make-up of the book I edited is not- and I wanted to clear the matter up and rectify the incorrect statements about the book.
Best wishes Angela Kennedy—Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.80.12 ( talk • contribs) 23:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
If "Jane Roe" herself, and the very forefathers (foremothers, whatever) don't count, I'm not sure who/what does. Junulo ( talk) 16:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
This article doesn't contain a single reliable authoritative source regarding Pro-life feminism. The Pomeroy citation is a student's paper and states at the top of the page that it is not authoritative [ [7]]. I am removing this citation and tagging the article for reliable sources and inline citations. Phyesalis ( talk) 16:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I added a list of famous feminists who were pro-life. 82.154.82.216 ( talk) 23:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
I was surprised when I found Maya Angelou listed as a pro life feminist. I thought this was surprising. I found a link to a story where she attended her grandson's graduation at St Johns but was not invited to speak. The article said it would have been unusual for her, a supporter of abortion rights to have spoken at a Catholic University. So whose wrong? Someone should look into it. Here's a link to the story. Here it is http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2008/05/22/2008-05-22_st_johns_misses_out_on_maya_angelou_as_s.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.242.174 ( talk) 22:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I have done further follow up on Ms. Maya Angelou. There is no source citation for her position on this question and I have called several pro life organizations (FFL, DFL, ALL) and none of them recognize her as a spokesperson for the pro life view. In my previous post I added a link to a story that describes her as a supporter of abortion rights. I think I will delete her name. However I would be very happy to be proven wrong.
In one of her archived Talk Pages it´s mencioned that she was a supporter of Consistent Life Ethic. Probably it´s wrong. It was based in that reference that she was added to the list. 213.13.243.223 ( talk) 21:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
"Pro-life feminism is the opposition to abortion, based on feminism. Those who take this viewpoint assert that abortion is not a necessary right, but has instead served to hurt women more than it has benefited them. Further, proponents state that abortion does not empower women, but creates a disempowered body of women who are seen by society to only profit off a violent act against their bodies and their offspring."
I contend that
1. This lede has elements of a political manifesto. It is not a simple description or a definition.
2. The 'list of famous pro-life feminists' blithely asserts that they are such without regard to any parameters.
3. The list seemingly does not consider the definition of the lede in choosing that list. Although I can see the possibility that many of the women in the list of famous pro-life feminists may believe the creed in the lede, there can be evidence of less than a handful who have actually 'asserted' as such. I note especially the ones who weren't alive to see the manifesto of pro-life feminism, and in some cases, the emergence of either constituent part as a movement, such as
Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797).
Anarchangel (
talk)
18:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
This section has and had atrocious sourcing. I've removed two completely unacceptable sources (one circularly based on Wikipedia, one to an advocacy group). What remains is a link to Feministsforlife.org, which I would also consider to be rather unreliable. This seems to be similar to the later-day-saints retroactively claiming Gallileo and Newton, because they would have been Mormons if Mormonism had existed in their time. I'm tempted to remove the whole section if no better sources can be found. Mother Theresa was a feminist? -- Stephan Schulz ( talk) 01:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Clearly you require politics, and I do not. Seems self-defeating to argue much, but you will have to convince dictionaries that political position is essential to the definition. I do not have to convince them of anything. Collect ( talk) 15:50, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
In response to the WP:3O request. Feminism refers to a particular political and cultural movement. The related principles have existed much longer than the movement itself. However, people should only be listed as feminist if references relate them to the movement itself, not the principles. If the references describe the individuals self-identifying as feminists, or interacting with other self-identified feminists, they should be restored to the list. If the references only describe individuals showing feminist-like behavior, to list them as a feminist would be in violation of WP:NOR. -- Elplatt ( talk) 04:53, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I think that "Feminism" is seen here in a very general sense. It makes sense to show a list of famous feminists who were anti-abortion in their time or in nowdays. Of course it´s a cliché to state that we don´t know if their position would change it they were alive today, but reading their beliefs in the issue I find hard to agree on that. The point is that they condemned abortion as anti-feminist act and a crime. 213.13.243.223 ( talk) 21:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
The list should stay. Pro-life feminism as his roots in the 18th and 19th century anti-abortion feminists, who comdemned abortion as a crime, so it´s all related. I don´t see why some people have a problem with that. Many anti-death penalty activists also existed back then and they still can be used to legitimate many of nowadays anti-death penalty arguements. 213.13.245.47 ( talk) 13:47, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Your conclusions only prove that you´re totally unaware that one of the main purposes of the anti-abortion 18th and 19th century movement, while abortion was illegal in virtually all the western world, was not only the safety of women´s health but also the deffense of the right to live of the unborn. I can point you ALL the anti-abortion 19th century feminists, the most famous like Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, like the less known like Sarah F. Norton or Juliet Stillman Severance who gave value to human life in the first stages of pregnancy. By the way, currently anti-abortion and pro-life means the same. The fact the only in the late 20th century pro-life became more common doesn´t invalidate that they are in the same lineage as the previous anti-abortion feminists. About the correct meaning of "feminist", I guess it should include women who openly consider themselfs that way. It wouldn´t be that difficult to find reliable sources. Other alternative it would be to trace the evolution of the anti-abortion feminist movement since the 18th century to nowadays. It´s simply laughable the idea of trying to make a paralel between mormon religious beliefs and anti-abortion feminism, because Newton lived long before Mormonism even existed. Mistico ( talk) 00:49, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
This article is about pro-life feminism not the FFL. Anyway, I see you´re a self described expert without anything that needs to be learn about the anti-abortion movement History. "There was no anti-abortion movement in the 18th and 19th centuries. None at all." Sorry but that´s the same as stating that there wasn´t an anti-slavery movement or an anti-death penalty movement. This is for serious discussions. Mistico ( talk) 16:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
If someone in the 19 th century, like John Quincy Adams opposed slavery this makes him also anti-slavery, even if he was never a member of the organized anti-slavery movement. 82.154.85.214 ( talk) 16:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
There wasn't really an anti-abortion feminist movement in the 19th century. What existed, in the USA and in other countries, where several feminist movements or independent feminists who reinvidicate the right to vote, to equal education for both genders, and often also took stances against issues like abortion, the death penalty and slavery. It would be more precise to speak of anti-abortion feminism, like a stance took on this issue by many of the feminists of the 19th and first half of the 20th century. Pro-life feminism, as an organized movement only developed in the second half of the 20th century, specially after the 1960s, when the pro-choice movement become more influencial. It makes however all the sense that modern pro-life feminism claims to be in the heritage of the anti-abortion feminist tradition of the past, in the same way that pro-choice feminism reinvidicates the same about the 19th and 20th century feminists who supported legal abortion. The same goes for modern anti-death penalty supporters who use the heritage and the stances made against the death penalty in the past from people like Thomas Paine and Victor Hugo, or for the death penalty by people like Thomas Aquinas and Abraham Lincoln. The times change but these controversial issues remain. 85.243.70.146 ( talk) 04:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I have removed all names that were not in the cited source, per WP:V. Please feel free to restore any names IF you can supply a reliable source stating they are "pro-life" and that they are "feminists". You cannot user personal knowledge or definitions, or else that would be original research. This list was basically nonsense, and it was begging for major clean up. Hopefully this will inspire editors to go out and actually follow wikipedia policies and cite sources, if anyone wants these names to be restored. I also am a little concerned with the reliability of our one cited source (the partisan, advocacy group Feminists for Life), and I'm concerned with Anachronism in that the term "pro-life" was not used way back when... it's be better to at least list them as being against abortion then retroactively applying a term that didn't exist back then to them... anyway, good luck with improving the list!- Andrew c [talk] 18:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
The current picture suggests that pro-life feminists either come from exitic countries or are predominantly motivated by religion. Yet the text says something different. Thus the pic should be changed. 78.131.137.50 ( talk) 22:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Some people seem to think that this article should be centered about that organization. This site is one of some many that proved the historicity of the anti-abortion movement since the 18th century. [15] 82.154.85.214 ( talk) 16:23, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
"Pro-life feminism is the opposition to abortion, based on feminism, which simultaneously upholds the rights of women and fetuses" Cloonmore ( talk) 03:24, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
What are other feminists think about so-called pro-life feminism? This position is lacking in the article! -- till we ☼☽ | Talk 14:35, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
I removed most of a long commentary on Roman Catholic "New Feminism." It gives the impression that prolife feminists are all Roman Catholics, and Catholics who accept official doctrine at that. Not so.--M.
I removed this biased, non-NPOV, non-sourced commentary:
This comment does not have one source listed on who said these things, when they were said, etc. It is the commentary of a Wikipedian, and as such, it is non-NPOV and must be removed. I will keep removing it too if a source, or citation, is not provided. -- Keetoowah 18:53, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
There was a citation, and you removed it. There was a citation to an essay in The Nation presenting exactly that opinion. It is not non-NPOV to present the existence of dissenting opinions. I am restoring it, because your criticism is unfounded. -- Soultaco 20:34, 2 October 2005 (UTC)
I cleaned up the criticism section and set it off from the main blob of text, but there is a problem: The pro life response to the criticism is full of logical errors:
-- Zaorish 19:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)
Well, I didn't write that, but I think I might know what the user meant in regards to the "tool for profit" concept. I have read pro-life feminist material that points to the profits groups like Planned Parenthood receive as an example of their true goals. I think that one at least, is valid to place under the counter arguments.
But overall, I don't think three lines suffices as a response to criticism. That part needs to be expanded with some more detail, or deleted altogether, as I see it.-- GenkiDama 21:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
(undent) The "Feminism and Non-Violence Studies Association" is not an organization. It is the brainchild of Rachel MacNair, president of Feminists for Life for 10 years. The "organization" published a grand total of five newsletters and one "online book" that reads like an essay. The last time MacNair published anything through FNSA was seven years ago, in 2000. All of the people listed above as members of Feminists for Life are involved with this "association".
Angela Kennedy's book is a collection of nine essays. The two of those which focus on pro-life feminism in terms of abortion are written by MacNair and Krane Derr. Grenier Sweet doesn't even mention feminism on her website. It's the same voices, over and over.
The views of a vocal minority should not be inflated to look as though it's a social movement, then given a platform through Wikipedia to espouse their views. Joie de Vivre 22:38, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
(undent) WP:Crystal. It's not appropriate to speculate on the relevance of a philosophy that has not gained momentum or visibility in a movement. If the best evidence of any such movement is a single organization, a couple of books written by members of that organization, and a short-lived writing club founded by the president of the organization, we do not have a discrete movement here beyond the organization. Joie de Vivre 17:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
Hi there, As the actual editor of “Swimming Against the Tide: Feminist Dissent on the issue of Abortion”, and with the book/contributors notes in front of me, I can tell you the following:
Two contributors are North American members of the FNSA, co-authors of ‘Pro-life Feminism: Yesterday and Today, and have had past affiliations with Feminists for Life. One other author is a British member of the FNSA.
One contributor was active in the British Groups Feminists Against Eugenics and Women for Life.
Two contributors were active in the British socialist pro-life Group the Labour Life Group, one as Women’s Officer.
One contributor is a founder member of the group Feminists for Life of Ireland.
Four contributors are unaffiliated to any group as such, but identified as pro-life feminists.
The foreword was written by Mary McAleese, some months before she became President of Ireland.
All contributors were critiquing abortion from a feminist perspective, hence the title of the book! Contrary to Joie de Vivre’s assertion, they were ALL focusing on pro-life feminism in terms of abortion (although other life issues are also present in the book).
I think this provides good evidence that there is a pro-life feminist movement, especially if added to the Grenier Sweet multi-author anthology. There are what I would call many other examples of pro-life feminist activity. There’s even a pro-life feminist Yahoo Group!
But I think the denial of there being a ‘movement’ here in the first place is odd. There are many grass-roots movements for justice all around the world: there does not need to have been a multitude of literature to ‘prove’ that a movement exists (especially if movements are not necessarily highly literary as such) . I can also tell you I get quite regular emails/letters from women (more often younger women) who have come across the book and find they share the concerns expressed within. Obviously this is just anecdote on my part- but the make-up of the book I edited is not- and I wanted to clear the matter up and rectify the incorrect statements about the book.
Best wishes Angela Kennedy—Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.0.80.12 ( talk • contribs) 23:21, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
If "Jane Roe" herself, and the very forefathers (foremothers, whatever) don't count, I'm not sure who/what does. Junulo ( talk) 16:21, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
This article doesn't contain a single reliable authoritative source regarding Pro-life feminism. The Pomeroy citation is a student's paper and states at the top of the page that it is not authoritative [ [7]]. I am removing this citation and tagging the article for reliable sources and inline citations. Phyesalis ( talk) 16:18, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
I added a list of famous feminists who were pro-life. 82.154.82.216 ( talk) 23:46, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
I was surprised when I found Maya Angelou listed as a pro life feminist. I thought this was surprising. I found a link to a story where she attended her grandson's graduation at St Johns but was not invited to speak. The article said it would have been unusual for her, a supporter of abortion rights to have spoken at a Catholic University. So whose wrong? Someone should look into it. Here's a link to the story. Here it is http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/queens/2008/05/22/2008-05-22_st_johns_misses_out_on_maya_angelou_as_s.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.31.242.174 ( talk) 22:26, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I have done further follow up on Ms. Maya Angelou. There is no source citation for her position on this question and I have called several pro life organizations (FFL, DFL, ALL) and none of them recognize her as a spokesperson for the pro life view. In my previous post I added a link to a story that describes her as a supporter of abortion rights. I think I will delete her name. However I would be very happy to be proven wrong.
In one of her archived Talk Pages it´s mencioned that she was a supporter of Consistent Life Ethic. Probably it´s wrong. It was based in that reference that she was added to the list. 213.13.243.223 ( talk) 21:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
"Pro-life feminism is the opposition to abortion, based on feminism. Those who take this viewpoint assert that abortion is not a necessary right, but has instead served to hurt women more than it has benefited them. Further, proponents state that abortion does not empower women, but creates a disempowered body of women who are seen by society to only profit off a violent act against their bodies and their offspring."
I contend that
1. This lede has elements of a political manifesto. It is not a simple description or a definition.
2. The 'list of famous pro-life feminists' blithely asserts that they are such without regard to any parameters.
3. The list seemingly does not consider the definition of the lede in choosing that list. Although I can see the possibility that many of the women in the list of famous pro-life feminists may believe the creed in the lede, there can be evidence of less than a handful who have actually 'asserted' as such. I note especially the ones who weren't alive to see the manifesto of pro-life feminism, and in some cases, the emergence of either constituent part as a movement, such as
Mary Wollstonecraft (1759-1797).
Anarchangel (
talk)
18:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)
This section has and had atrocious sourcing. I've removed two completely unacceptable sources (one circularly based on Wikipedia, one to an advocacy group). What remains is a link to Feministsforlife.org, which I would also consider to be rather unreliable. This seems to be similar to the later-day-saints retroactively claiming Gallileo and Newton, because they would have been Mormons if Mormonism had existed in their time. I'm tempted to remove the whole section if no better sources can be found. Mother Theresa was a feminist? -- Stephan Schulz ( talk) 01:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Clearly you require politics, and I do not. Seems self-defeating to argue much, but you will have to convince dictionaries that political position is essential to the definition. I do not have to convince them of anything. Collect ( talk) 15:50, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
In response to the WP:3O request. Feminism refers to a particular political and cultural movement. The related principles have existed much longer than the movement itself. However, people should only be listed as feminist if references relate them to the movement itself, not the principles. If the references describe the individuals self-identifying as feminists, or interacting with other self-identified feminists, they should be restored to the list. If the references only describe individuals showing feminist-like behavior, to list them as a feminist would be in violation of WP:NOR. -- Elplatt ( talk) 04:53, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
I think that "Feminism" is seen here in a very general sense. It makes sense to show a list of famous feminists who were anti-abortion in their time or in nowdays. Of course it´s a cliché to state that we don´t know if their position would change it they were alive today, but reading their beliefs in the issue I find hard to agree on that. The point is that they condemned abortion as anti-feminist act and a crime. 213.13.243.223 ( talk) 21:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
The list should stay. Pro-life feminism as his roots in the 18th and 19th century anti-abortion feminists, who comdemned abortion as a crime, so it´s all related. I don´t see why some people have a problem with that. Many anti-death penalty activists also existed back then and they still can be used to legitimate many of nowadays anti-death penalty arguements. 213.13.245.47 ( talk) 13:47, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
Your conclusions only prove that you´re totally unaware that one of the main purposes of the anti-abortion 18th and 19th century movement, while abortion was illegal in virtually all the western world, was not only the safety of women´s health but also the deffense of the right to live of the unborn. I can point you ALL the anti-abortion 19th century feminists, the most famous like Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony, like the less known like Sarah F. Norton or Juliet Stillman Severance who gave value to human life in the first stages of pregnancy. By the way, currently anti-abortion and pro-life means the same. The fact the only in the late 20th century pro-life became more common doesn´t invalidate that they are in the same lineage as the previous anti-abortion feminists. About the correct meaning of "feminist", I guess it should include women who openly consider themselfs that way. It wouldn´t be that difficult to find reliable sources. Other alternative it would be to trace the evolution of the anti-abortion feminist movement since the 18th century to nowadays. It´s simply laughable the idea of trying to make a paralel between mormon religious beliefs and anti-abortion feminism, because Newton lived long before Mormonism even existed. Mistico ( talk) 00:49, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
This article is about pro-life feminism not the FFL. Anyway, I see you´re a self described expert without anything that needs to be learn about the anti-abortion movement History. "There was no anti-abortion movement in the 18th and 19th centuries. None at all." Sorry but that´s the same as stating that there wasn´t an anti-slavery movement or an anti-death penalty movement. This is for serious discussions. Mistico ( talk) 16:15, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
If someone in the 19 th century, like John Quincy Adams opposed slavery this makes him also anti-slavery, even if he was never a member of the organized anti-slavery movement. 82.154.85.214 ( talk) 16:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
There wasn't really an anti-abortion feminist movement in the 19th century. What existed, in the USA and in other countries, where several feminist movements or independent feminists who reinvidicate the right to vote, to equal education for both genders, and often also took stances against issues like abortion, the death penalty and slavery. It would be more precise to speak of anti-abortion feminism, like a stance took on this issue by many of the feminists of the 19th and first half of the 20th century. Pro-life feminism, as an organized movement only developed in the second half of the 20th century, specially after the 1960s, when the pro-choice movement become more influencial. It makes however all the sense that modern pro-life feminism claims to be in the heritage of the anti-abortion feminist tradition of the past, in the same way that pro-choice feminism reinvidicates the same about the 19th and 20th century feminists who supported legal abortion. The same goes for modern anti-death penalty supporters who use the heritage and the stances made against the death penalty in the past from people like Thomas Paine and Victor Hugo, or for the death penalty by people like Thomas Aquinas and Abraham Lincoln. The times change but these controversial issues remain. 85.243.70.146 ( talk) 04:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I have removed all names that were not in the cited source, per WP:V. Please feel free to restore any names IF you can supply a reliable source stating they are "pro-life" and that they are "feminists". You cannot user personal knowledge or definitions, or else that would be original research. This list was basically nonsense, and it was begging for major clean up. Hopefully this will inspire editors to go out and actually follow wikipedia policies and cite sources, if anyone wants these names to be restored. I also am a little concerned with the reliability of our one cited source (the partisan, advocacy group Feminists for Life), and I'm concerned with Anachronism in that the term "pro-life" was not used way back when... it's be better to at least list them as being against abortion then retroactively applying a term that didn't exist back then to them... anyway, good luck with improving the list!- Andrew c [talk] 18:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
The current picture suggests that pro-life feminists either come from exitic countries or are predominantly motivated by religion. Yet the text says something different. Thus the pic should be changed. 78.131.137.50 ( talk) 22:54, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Some people seem to think that this article should be centered about that organization. This site is one of some many that proved the historicity of the anti-abortion movement since the 18th century. [15] 82.154.85.214 ( talk) 16:23, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
"Pro-life feminism is the opposition to abortion, based on feminism, which simultaneously upholds the rights of women and fetuses" Cloonmore ( talk) 03:24, 26 October 2010 (UTC)