|


No Happy Ending for Abortion
By John Horvat II
In the early days of women’s “liberation,”
many activists saw abortion as a necessary and even desirable
component of the sexual revolution of the sixties. Freed
from childbearing, women could engage in numerous relationships
without consequences.
However, like many of the tenets of feminism
itself, such attitudes no longer prevail. In the grueling
battle over abortion, there is growing public perception of
antipathy to the barbarous practice. There is a certain remorse
surrounding the issue that even its most ardent supporters
find difficult to overcome.
Such a perception represents a psychological
victory on the part of those pro-life forces whose tireless
efforts have put a tiny human face on abortion. They have
turned the debate into a moral problem that gnaws at the
conscience of the nation. It is a matter for which there
is no happy ending.
Cultural War in Hollywood
One area where this attitude is reflected
is Hollywood – long a producer of happy endings.
American conservatives have fought a long
and relentless Cultural War with Hollywood over its regular
and shameless fare of violence, profanity, sex and nudity.
Because of this, huge portions of middle America have abandoned
a box office which they once frequented. Hollywood responded
by simply writing them off.
The interesting news from the front is
that Hollywood is steering clear of abortion – a development
that seems to suggest that more than just conservatives
are disturbed by the portrayal.
In her June 10 article, “On
Abortion, Hollywood Is No-Choice,” New York
Times writer Mireya Navarro reveals a skittish film
industry that tiptoes around the abortion controversy. She
reports that film characters that find themselves pregnant
rarely resort to abortion. They hardly utter the word. Writers
will often have their characters conveniently miscarry or
even keep the baby to avoid the A-word solution.
A Change of Heart?
Such portrayals hardly represent a change
of heart.
However, it is indicative of a national
uneasiness about abortion that is so sensitive that even
almighty Hollywood dares not push the envelope.
In her article, Mireya Navarro mentions
“directors of feel-good movies don’t want to
risk portraying their heroines as unsympathetic characters.”
She quotes Jonathan Kuntz, an American film
history professor at the University of California, Los Angeles,
as saying: “It’s something that’s going
to turn off people on both sides unless you do it just right.
It’s no surprise Hollywood avoids it.”
She notes that even in films that do feature
abortion such as “The Cider House Rules,” the
women do not fare well in their portrayals. Abortion is
simply not big box office matter. Even television where
the market is more fragmented avoids abortion to avoid alienating
advertisers, affiliates and viewers.
Indeed, Ms. Navarro cites writers who have
no problem broaching other controversial topics, like nudity,
premarital sex and homosexual relationships. However, when
it comes to taking out abortion references, writers curiously
do not scream censorship but seem spinelessly resigned to
stay clear of the subject. One writer even meekly defended
a network decision to pull an episode of his work as “the
best we could figure out under the circumstances.”
Christopher Keyser, co-creator of the Fox
drama “Party of Five,” credits the vibrant pro-life
movement as one reason for this attitude. “Even though
a majority may favor abortion rights,” he mistakenly
affirms, “the minority position is extremely active
and vocal.”
In fact, not only is abortion avoided but
opposition is growing. “In the twenty-first century,
abortion is at the top of the taboo heap,” said Robert
Thompson, a professor of television and popular culture at
Syracuse University. “Abortion is not only at the top
of it, but it’s climbed higher, where other taboos have
fallen off the mountain”(J. Pender Zane,“Hollywood
Tiptoes Around Abortion,” Raleigh News & Observer,
6/12/2007).
Making Hollywood Tremble
News of the Hollywood refusal to deal with
abortion has set the feminist blogosphere all ablaze with
recriminations at the film industry for caving in to the
conservative and religious right. One commentator even accused
Hollywood of fostering a “destructive pro-life culture.”
However, avoiding abortion on film is not
about conservatives or their agenda. Hollywood has long
ignored that market niche. Rather it reflects a much broader
public perception that worries the film industry. Unlike
so many other countries who have matter-of-factly accepted
abortion as a “medical matter,” America is different.
Hollywood trembles because of the American
people’s deep ambivalence about abortion. Despite
all the rhetoric about “celebrating choice,”
feminists have been unable to erase the tragedy that inevitably
follows abortion. They cannot shake the stigma that comes
attached. Even the most ardent pro-abortion political candidates
must cast abortion as a sad and unfortunate necessity that
is best avoided.
This happened because an “extremely
active and vocal” pro-life movement has kept the moral
reality of abortion before the public. By fearlessly opposing
the killing of unborn human life, abortion has taken on
a moral dimension that has divided the nation. However,
even more importantly, it has divided the pro-abortionists
and their sympathizers who now express misgivings and doubts
about the barbarous practice.
While the battle to end abortion is far
from over, the silence in “no-choice” Hollywood
speaks volumes.
|