The Politics of Motherhood Revisited

Although abortion has bitterly divided millions of Americans for decades, there has hardly been any academic disagreement over the nature of the controversy. A consensus quickly developed around Kristin Luker’s classic study, Abortion and the Politics of Motherhood, first published in 1984.² No other work on abortion politics has approached its influence. As of this writing it has been cited over one thousand times, far more than any other essay or book on abortion.³

One of Luker’s most interesting arguments is that the pro-life movement is not what it appears because its deepest motives have nothing to do with the fetus. Instead, citizens are drawn to pro-life activism, according to Luker, because legalized abortion is a referendum on their traditional view of motherhood. Abortion devalues women’s traditional roles as homemakers and mothers, which pro-life activists regard as natural and fulfilling. This insight paved the way for Luker’s most provocative claim: “While on the surface it is the embryo’s fate that seems to be at stake, the abortion debate is actually about the meaning of women’s lives” (emphasis in the original).⁴

New evidence, however, suggests that pro-life activism and beliefs have little to do with gender traditionalism. This essay draws on survey data from the National Election Survey to show that while both pro-life and pro-choice citizens have liberalized on gender issues in recent decades, gender liberalization has actually been more pronounced among pro-life citizens. This is partly because pro-choice citizens were already in a feminist vanguard when Luker did her fieldwork. But it is also the case that pro-life citizens have been far more influenced by feminist ideals than Luker could have foreseen. And if the views of young pro-life citizens are any indication of the future, the abortion wars will be increasingly waged by gender …