Whether it was at the height of 2nd Wave Feminism of the 1970s with Roe v Wade and the ERA, or the dogma churned out by Women’s Studies programs of 3rd Wave Feminism starting in the 1990’s, the dismissive answer to any questioning or criticism of left-feminism’s increasing radicalized goals was the same.

What kind of woman are you for opposing women having equal rights?

Women have learned to take such Feminists at their word. If Feminism is defined as the primacy of Equal Rights, then we sisters who believe in equal rights but who may disagree on issues of economics or culture or politics are just as feminist. We can be feminist AND be capitalist, individualist, religious and pro-life.

Why, no, claims The Nation’s Katha Pollitt. One cannot be a feminist and pro-life. [Can’t you hear her stamping her little feet when she says this? … ed.]

Because Equal Rights isn’t a definition of Feminism – Pro-Abortion is.

Without abortion rights, there isn’t a lot left to the fundamental ideals of equality and self-determination. …

One sperm can derail a woman for life. The patriarchal religions that sustain the anti-abortion movement explicitly oppose those ideals and correctly recognize that reproductive rights are what make them possible. …

[E]ven when it’s made by hipsters, the anti-choice argument inevitably demands that a woman drop everything to incubate that egg, so how would that work out?

Let’s put aside Pollitt’s risible strawman constructs for a moment and cut to her essential claim: Feminism is not defined by equal rights under the Constitution but by the ability to obtain the death of another human being for any reason, or no reason at all.

Equal opportunity to open a business, attend a trade school, pursue a career? Oh NOES!!! Not that! It’s about lovely, lovely destruction of an unborn baby products of conception. Abortion is a social good!

Even if your reading of Pollitt is limited to this one question-begging diatribe, one finds delicious irony in her statement …

The Constitution is not a popularity contest.

… while she plays bait-and-switch with polls about the legalization of abortion-on-demand.

The fact remains that a plurality of people do not support Pollitt’s, or Hillary Clinton’s, position on abortion through the ninth month and even Roe v Wade and Casey allow protection for the human life that is uniquely different from his or her’s mother.

Has anyone ever asked Katha what kind of woman is she to support killing another human being based on location and convenience?

What kind of inevitable message is she sending about the ability of women to act as responsible adults?

It’s not The Patriarchy™ infantilizing women into whiney girls demanding free tampons, safe spaces and free contraceptives. It is anti-capitalist females like Pollitt who want keep cooking the same dishes in Leftism’s kitchen rather than deal with the challenges, duties and responsibilities of life in a Liberty based world.

TANSTAAFL, Katha. TANSTAAFL