The reinvention of Ann Widdecombe

I don't actually watch Strictly Come Dancing, but from clips on news sites and reports I have looked at, it seems old Widders as she is affectionately known is coming across as a bit of a card . Willing to be pulled across the floor looking ridiculous, being a good sport and feisty with the judges seems to add up to being the latest 'national treasure.'

Well she may be willing to make a fool of herself, but she certainly isn't some nice eccentric old bird .

Well for those of you with short memories , Pickled Politics has a handy list and links to highlight why old Widders is actually an unpleasant reactionary piece of work . The post reminds us of her homophobic, sexist, anti abortion and more. The only plus point is she is against fox hunting .

The F-Word has a link to an Abortion Rights planned protest . Widdecombe is speaking at a fundraiser for an anti choice group , exploiting her new found image as a nice harmless old eccentric. Details here.

Last nights pro choice demo

Think I'm the last to post on the demo!

Met with Jon and MarshaJane in the pub first, well need a few drinks before facing the reactionary god bothers that we knew would be there .

The pro choice demo was lively . Now I have probably missed people out, but I spotted the RMT, NUT, Respect Renewal, Socialist Resistance, Left List, SWP, AWL, Feminist Fightback and the LRC/Women's Left Network in attendance . Oh and of course Abortion Rights; as we approached their pink placards and balloons stood out especially against the plain banners of the men telling women what to do with their bodies. Yep, this isn't a balanced post :-)

It was a good humoured demo, and although smaller than pro choice demos of old, it felt positive and noisy with a fair few stroppy women!
Afterwards back to the pub to calm our nerves whilst waiting for the results .

I'll post my thoughts in a few days about where next for abortion rights.

Here are a few pictures, they aren't great as I used a camera phone and didn't manage to get a picture from a good enough angle to show the size of it.

The one and only MarshaJane :

















General demo pics :





















Feminist Fightback:
















Respect Renewal :

(I was told by one of their members that if Galloway didn't vote to support a woman's right to choose, RR policy, they would have words with him. Horse,stable door , bolted springs to mind.)

















LRCers demonstrating team work putting up the banner while I stand by and take pics, helpful like.
















Hymn singing non murderous non whores

















More at Liam's, F Word, HarpyMarx, Union Futures and "Shut Up, Sit Down "has links to lots of other posts and pics.

Update on the Human Embryology and Fertilisation Bill

So far today :

Legislation to widen the scope of medical research has cleared its first hurdle as a bid to ban hybrid human animal embryos was defeated by MPs.

Tory MP Edward Leigh's attempt to outlaw the creation of hybrid embryos was voted down by 336 votes to 176.

He argued the technique was "a step too far". Catholic cabinet ministers Ruth Kelly, Des Browne and Paul Murphy voted for a ban. PM Gordon Brown opposed it.

MPs are set to vote on whether to allow "saviour siblings" at about 2230 BST.

Tomorrow its the vote on the anti abortion amendments.

Another part of the Bill that hasn't received so much attention is the one to remove the requirement of clinics to take into account the need for a father.

Pink News explains :

At present the law requires that NHS fertility clinics take account of the "need for a father" when assessing women for treatment.

In practice this can lead to clinics deciding not to accept lesbians and those women instead using "DIY" methods in order to conceive.

"Lesbians tend to be refused service or made to pay for it under the current arrangements," explained Ruth Hunt, head of policy at gay equality organisation Stonewall.

"Some clinics have a blanket ban on same-sex couples and ultimately it is down to the clinicians.

"That leads many lesbians to have to use informal methods, which can lead to legal difficulties.

"Lesbians should have a choice."

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill contains new rules that will allow gay and lesbian couples to become the legal parents of a child conceived through donated sperm.

The provisions also mean that lesbians will have equal access to fertility services, which could mean IVF but is much more likely to mean assisted conception.

The new rules would mean that civil partners will automatically become the legal parents of the child, even if the child is conceived 'informally' ie: not through a clinic.

The two people named on the birth certificate would also be legally responsible for the child.

On dissolution of a civil partnership the current law allows the courts to consider maintenance payments for the child.

DIY sperm donation will still be legal but under the proposed laws the non-birth mother not in a civil partnership could not be on the birth certificate.

The advantages of using a fertility clinic mean that the donor is registered, and cannot be legally held responsible for the child's welfare or upkeep.

His name does not appear on the birth certificate.

Details of the donor, such as his last known address, name and medical information are kept and can be shown to the child when he or she reaches 18, or before if the legal parents consent.

For men who may be asked by a lesbian friend to donate sperm, there is the legal reassurance that they can donate informally if they want, become a registered donor, and know that they will not be legally responsible for the child's maintenance.

This seems to give both children and parents a stronger legal footing and surely must be better for them ,unless of course you see all this as 'pretend' families. A heterosexual marriage certificate does not guarantee a happy or stable childhood. Lesbians, or gay men, can make great parents or crap ones, just like heterosexuals.

The New Tories of course are not really that 'progressive,' and are none to keen at this proposal .Seems they are being encouraged to vote against it.

Brown, not really great on judgement at the moment, is willing to dump the rights of lesbians to avoid further defeats :

The Prime Minister has accepted that he will have to sacrifice a measure on parenthood in order to save legislation to allow new embryo research and treatments.

Labour MPs determined to oppose the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill are being quietly urged to direct their anger at proposals to scrap the requirement that IVF clinics consider the child’s “need for a father”, The Times has learnt. Equality campaigners say that the requirement breaches the human rights of lesbians seeking fertility treatment. But ministers believe that the measure is marginal compared with tonight’s key votes on allowing the creation of human-animal hybrid embyros and so-called saviour siblings.

Yep, LGBT rights are 'marginal,' I'd never have guessed. And when did equality become a matter of conscience ? Would it be acceptable, as a Labour MP, to vote for inequality based on race or gender ?

Abortion Rights and the Left

Abortion rights are once again under attack with amendments to the Human Embryology and Fertilisation Bill.

The left need to unite behind the defence of the 24 weeks limit. They also need to work with feminist groups to push for a liberalisation of abortion law ,as a minimum a move to one doctor’s signature and preferably abortion on demand.

Abortion, and of course the wider issue of reproductive rights, still seems to be an area that the left need to be pushed on. Yeah they will often make the right noises, but they will make excuses for anti abortion men such as Galloway, and yet I can’t see them being quite so tolerant if someone was, ooh let’s say pro war. But abortion is a women’s issue isn’t it, it’s not quite up there with the serious male leftie men and their real politics about war and arguing the toss over the finer obscure theoretical points of Marxism or who did what when to whom in 1983.

That’s not to say the majority of the left aren’t pro choice and I’m not going to bang on about Galloway as it’s pointless. Those who support him will just get defensive and start going on about what the SWP did when they were in Respect blah blah blah and that we are all hypocrites blah blah blah. That of course misses the fact that those who are critical are not all SWPers (I have never been a member) and have been raising these issues well before the spilt.

So let’s not get diverted. Galloway will be off to his lucrative media career in a few years anyway.

Back to the subject, the left and pro choice, why should they get their finger out on this?

Much has been said on this, so I will try to focus on what I see as specific issues for the left, starting with the fact that working class women are those who lose out the most when abortion rights are restricted. Money has always helped procure such services from discreet private doctors. Working class women, pre 1967, had to make do with the back street abortionists and the resultant risks to health, potentially fatal.

Some on the left get caught up by the reasons for abortion and then sympathise with the conclusion that abortion should be restricted or is a bad thing.
Many argue that it’s wrong that women should have to have an abortion because they can’t afford a child. Well yes, but the answer is not to make it illegal, all that does is put those women at risk. The left need to fight for better childcare, benefits, wages.
Even with improved finances some women may still decide that they don’t want more or even any children and that should be their right. And some won’t feel bad about it or suffer psychologically, especially without the guilt trips from others .

An issue that the left should grapple more with is disability rights. People with disability are often angry that it’s a ground for abortion. Are we trying to create perfection? On the flip side some with a disability, such as the hearing impaired, argue for the right to have a child with the same disability as them.

Now within the world of disabilities there is a wide spectrum. There was a case a while back of a teenager in Ireland who came to Britain for an abortion. She was refused it at home even though the baby would have died very soon after birth so severe were the disabilities. This case illustrates the lack of humanity of some anti abortionists, who would make a young girl suffer like that .No matter what we do, situations that sad will probably always occur.

Greyer areas are more complex. The reality is that, adopting a social model of disability, its society that causes the most problems. People with disabilities have less chances to earn a good wage , expectations of what their life will be like is lower and benefits inadequate. The physical environment is disabling. Many people, the left included, are still patronising and paternalistic to those with disabilities. Parents, and especially mothers, struggle to care for and bring up a child.

So what should the left’s response be to the conflicting views of women’s and disability rights?
I would argue the left must support the current rights women do have and argue for their extension as well as challenging the way disabled people are viewed in society, campaigning for better support for parents and their children with disabilities. We should challenge what is the norm and the increasing pressure for ‘perfect’ children,to argue for difference and diversity in people .We do not though make it more difficult for women to have an abortion and force them to have a child they do not feel they can cope with.

Finally, some point to left currents that are not pro choice, Nicaragua being one such example.

Nicaragua highlights the dangers of the left going along with religion and ignoring women’s rights. In Nicaragua it is a crime to have an abortion, even if the woman’s life is in danger. A report last year in the Guardian highlighted the costs to women of this law. It hits the poorest .

This central American country has become the third country in the world, after Chile and El Salvador, to criminalise all abortions. It is a blanket ban. There are no exceptions for rape, incest, or life- or health-threatening pregnancies.

"Nicaraguan doctors are now afraid of going to trial or jail and losing their licence," says Leonel Arguello, president of the Nicaraguan Society of General Medicine. "Many are thinking that instead of taking the risk, it is better to let a woman die."

For the Nicaraguan rich, a problematic pregnancy need not be a death sentence. You can fly to Miami or bribe a discreet private clinic in Managua. But in this wretchedly poor country most young women do not have money. Their choice is to go through with a pregnancy that may kill them, or attempt a DIY termination that may kill them.

As a result of the blanket ban enacted last November at least 82 women have died, according to advocacy groups.

The anti-abortion camp, in contrast, is euphoric. The new law, it says, is a beacon in the fight to protect the unborn. It is time to celebrate. "Now it is all penalised. And Catholics agree that is should be this way," says Roberto González, 50, a Franciscan priest in Managua. "The population sees the church as behind the law - behind the pressure that succeeded in getting the government to change the law."

Abortion has long been illegal in Nicaragua but there had been exceptions for "therapeutic" reasons if three doctors agreed there was a risk to the woman's life.
It is a grim irony that this is happening under a Sandinista government - a movement whose ranks once included advocates for feminism and abortion rights. That was in the 1980s, when the Sandinistas were secular marxists, wore combat fatigues and fought a bloody civil war against US-backed Contra rebels. Things changed. The war ended and the Sandinista leader, Daniel Ortega, lost the presidency in a 1990 election. Church and state were supposedly separate but clerics wielded political clout, none more so than Cardinal Miguel Obando y Bravo. His hostility sank Ortega's attempted comebacks in 1996 and 2001 elections.

In the run-up to last November's election, the cardinal spearheaded a campaign for a blanket abortion ban. Ortega, desperate to regain power, mobilised the Sandinistas behind the cardinal's campaign and helped get the ban enacted just days before the poll. The former revolutionary, now reinvented as a devout Catholic, was rewarded with the presidency.


The stories highlighted in the report show it’s the poorest who are most affected, that young women die and children are left without a mother, often going into care. I expect many of these women were catholic, allowed to die for the sake of a foetus that didn’t even survive.

The left needs to keep this in mind when it bows to religious groups. Where abortion is limited or illegal women die, the poorest suffer the most. It does not stop abortion happening, it does not reduce the causes and reasons for abortion, it does not mean people are more accepting of disability or difference. The left need to focus on reducing the causes, not excuse religious reactionary views on what women can do with their bodies .

The left needs to campaign to improve disability rights, access to good sex education and contraception, tell religious leaders to butt out and work to improve the rights, support and attitudes to disability and difference.

The left should accept that whatever we do to improve the financial situation of women, availability of contraception and quality of sex education, attitudes to disability and support available, that women still have control over their own bodies. That control should not lie with men, the state or any religious groups. It lies with the woman ‘our bodies, our choice’.

Also a guest post over at Liberal Conspiracy as part of their Coalition for Choice campaign.

Update :It seems some on the left feel that even if a woman would die, well so be it . Btw this is a man, who will never be faced with dilemas as being raped and then pregnant or dying in childbirth.So he would watch his partner die when she needn't? Hey, these religious types are so compassionate aren't they. Oh and its also a CLP blog.

More action on the Human Fertility and Embryology Bill

Just come across this site , the Coalition for Choice :

Coalition For Choice is an online network of concerned individuals who are broadly for choice, equality and women’s rights.
We consist of writers, bloggers, activists, journalists, academics and many more from different fields.
This coalition was put together specifically to support the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, though it will continue afterwards in campaigning for women’s rights.

Sounds well worth supporting .

There is info on events and ways to offer support, including :

White Coat Protest

Second Reading of Human Fertility and Embryology Bill - House of Commons 12th May 2008

Please join our “Scientists, doctors (bring white coats please!) and patients “Show of Support” at 1pm-2pm including media photocall outside Parliament
12th May 2008
Venue: At Old Palace Yard

Followed by drop in meeting with leading scientists, medics, patient representatives and politicians in Committee Room 7 from 2pm-3.30pm

Followed by the opportunity to watch the debate when it starts at 3.30pm live in the public gallery of the Commons chmaber

On 12th May 2008 the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill will have its second reading in the House of Commons.

Over the past months, there has been intensive lobbying of MPs, particularly from groups who are opposed to embryo research. MPs may not have heard quite so clearly from the patient groups, medics and scientists who strongly support the proposals in the bill and know that it is vitally important that the legislation is not watered down.

On Monday 12th May 2008 outside the Houses of Parliament we will seek to represent the breadth of the support for the Bill just before the debate begins by bringing representatives from the hundreds of patient groups together with scientists who support the Bill.

A YouGov poll in August 2005 showed that 77% of people accept embryo research for life-threatening diseases. But For far too long the only public shows of feeling on this issue have come from those who wish to vote down these much needed and progressive measures permitting carefully regulated embryo research and important and ethical clinical interventions like pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. So for the first time science and medicine is going to show its support for the bill.

So please join us to represent this majority and progressive opinion across the UK.
For more information please call Becky Purvis in the office of Dr Evan Harris MP on 0207 219 5128


Check out the site and do support it.

Update Check out Penny Red for 24 reasons to keep the 24 limit.

Demo in Glasgow

Anne Widdecombe and David Alton visited Glasgow on 23^rd January to discuss the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, the leaflet went on about human hybrids, the end of fatherhood and increased abortions. Quite alarmist that one bill could cause so much mayhem.

They and the audience were welcomed by over 150 students, socialists – a good turnout from Glasgow University Socialist Students - and pro-choice campaigners. The protest outside was probably jollier and livelier than the mumbo jumbo inside about doom and gloom about the decline of the family,the abolishment of daddies, irresponsible women and the horror of human-animal hybrids, a futuristic nightmare – no wonder they looked so horrified as they had to face a gauntlet of protesters demanding no going back to the backstreets.

The demonstration though mostly made up of women had great support from men to who over enthusiastically joined in with the slogan “our bodies, our lives, our right to decide” but it was an act of solidarity with their sisters as opposed to men demanding control of women’s bodies.

Those going into the meeting sort of blanked us and had to walk through a gauntlet which I have to say was quite intimidating. There was some pushing and shoving but nothing serious. The police were not really that interested and never intervened.

I wrote an article some years ago on abortion here it is if you are interested

Pro - choice demo this friday

Demo organised by Feminist Fightback :

"Don't Turn Back the Clock on Reproductive Freedoms!"

Christian Medical Foundation members gave evidence to the recent Parliamentary Science and Technology committee strongly advocating a reduction in the time limit for abortion, without disclosing their affiliation with the CMF.

They support Tory MP Nadine Dorries' minority report calling for a lowered time limit. We're picketing them to protest against their anti-women policies and show our support for abortion rights - join us!

Friday, 25th of January, 4pm outside the Christian Medical Fellowship HQ, Marsalsea Road, London SE1

Info: 07815 490 837 or volsunga@gmail.com
www.feministfightback.org.uk

Guest post - Abortion Rights Rally Launches New Fightback

I couldn't make the meeting last night.
Given the importance of the issue I wanted a report on the event , so Tami has kindly let me use her post on Shiraz.

Over to Tami ...





Last night, nearly 300 women and some men gathered in committee room 14 (and the neighbouring room for the overflow) to show their support for the upcoming battle in parliament for a woman’s right to choose. It really was inspiring to see so many women, and so many young women in particular, ready to stand up to those who would take us backward.

The three main parties spoke from the platform with female representatives from the Labour Party and Liberal Democrats and a male representative from the Conservatives. Many issues were discussed including precisely how we got to the point where Conservative Baroness Masham has used the unrelated Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill to attempt to tack on an amendment restricting a women’s right to choose.

In particular they are attempting to restrict abortion in the cases of “foetal abnormality”. Many in the pro-life, anti-woman movement claim to be speaking on behalf of disabled people. However, a rousing speech was given by Alex Kent from the NUS Disabled Students in defence of a woman’s right to choose and with a certain amount of indignation at those who would use disabled people as an excuse to restrict abortion access. Baroness Jenny Tonge (LD) spoke of how this restriction would require women who were carrying foetuses with no brain to full term and this was a condition she had witnessed herself as a medical professional.

There were a number of mentions made of the statistics such as those showing an 83% support amongst the British public for a woman’s right to choose and this led to references to “the silent pro-choice majority”. In addition, MP Evan Harris (LD) spoke about the scientific report which was produced in October of last year and overwhelmingly passed by a majority of MPs which concluded that there is no evidence to change the 24 week time limit and in fact further restrictions to access, like the requirement of obtaining two doctor’s signatures, should be scrapped.

Emily Thornberry MP (LP) who was sponsoring the meeting ran through a list of private member’s bills which have been presented but which have all, fortunately, failed. These included the proposal to have a “cooling off period” before the woman could proceed with an abortion, forced informing of parents for teenage women under a certain age, and a combination of the lowering of the time limits coupled with a cooling off period.

By far the most rousing speech of the evening was by Diane Abbott MP (LP). Diane wondered if this new fight around a women’s right to choose would involve MPs receiving plastic foetuses in the mail as they did in the 1990s when the issue was being debated. She then went on to utterly condemn those who claim that being opposed to abortion has to do with the right of children. “Where is this support once the child is born?” Abbott asked. She noted the hypocrisy, particularly concerning asylum seeker children and to much applause stated “This is an anti-woman campaign!” In addition, Diane was one of the few speakers to mention that there remained a fear of women’s sexuality which was woven into this debate. Finally she claimed, to more applause, that if these campaigners were so concerned about abortion rates, why did they also oppose sexual education?

Other speakers included representatives of the Fawcett Society, the Voice for Choice Network and Doctors for a Woman’s Choice. Each added their own unique perspective to the debate and educated all in attendance.

There was a discussion period afterward in which we heard from the Green Party, various NUS representatives and a very good showing from trade union activists. By the time one left there was a feeling of a new movement being born.

Having said this, there will obviously be struggles ahead. I would be remiss if I didn’t mention that it is a tragedy, and nothing less, that George Galloway will not participate in this movement nor speak out in favour of a woman’s right to choose. While there was a comrade there from the ISG (of whom I continue to have a tremendous amount of love and respect for), I continue to believe that the fact that a party which claims to be to the left of Labour cannot send its only MP to such meetings a great detriment to the left.

In addition, a comrade from Permanent Revolution was in attendance and was speaking to other comrades from Feminist Fightback after the meeting who were wholeheartedly in favour of direct action, demonstrations and loud protests. It is clear that others in the movement rely more on lobbying and writing to MPs. Having lived in the US and participated in clinic defence as well as pro-choice rallies in the face of very hostile and right-wing opposition, I am inclined to agree with those who want more of an emphasis on direct action to beat back the right.

To be fair, Abortion Rights has in fact called for some direct action against Anne Widdecombe’s “road trip” to whip up support for the anti-choice amendments. I am listing the dates, times and venues in full in the hope that it will help to gain support for protests across the country. I plan on being at the London counter-demo and encourage everyone to join us in this crucial fight for a women’s right to choose against the forces of reaction. Anne Widdecombe’s Anti-Woman Road Show Dates:

Glasgow, 23rd of January @ The University Union, 7:30pm
Southampton, 30th of January @ Univ of Southampton, 7:30pm
London, 6th of February @ Central Hall Westminster, 7pm
Liverpool, 12th February @ The Liner Hotel, 7:30pm
Coventry, 13th February @ Coventry Cathedral, 7:30pm
Widnes, 18th February @ The Foundry, Lugsale Rd, 7:30pm
Cardiff, 4th March @ TheCity Temple, Cowbridge Rd, 7:30pm

Join us! Let’s build this new fightback against the anti-woman campaigners in parliament and in the streets! Please consider joining and financially supporting Abortion Rights UK.

Defend the Abortion Act - Campaigning for a Woman's Right to Decide

Yep, another meeting at the Commons next wednesday.

Organised by Abortion Rights :

Public meeting - Wednesday 16th January 2008 Defend the Abortion Act - Campaigning for a Woman's Right to decide

7pm for a 7.30pm start, Committee room 10, House of Commons, nearest tube Westminster

All pro-choice supporters welcome!

This public meeting will kick off the pro-choice campaigning to defeat anti-abortion amendments to the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill currently in parliament and to support any opportunities to advance women’s abortion rights.

The meeting will hear a range of short contributions from invited speakers followed by time for contributions thoughts and ideas from the floor.

Speakers include: Baroness Joyce Gould; Baroness Jenny Tonge; Emily Thornberry MP; Katy Clark MP; Diane Abbott MP; Frances O'Grady, Deputy General Secretary TUC; Wendy Savage, Doctors for A Woman's Choice on Abortion; Anni Marjoram, adviser to the Mayor of London; Alex Kemp, NUS Disabled Students' Campaign; Katherine Rake, Director Fawcett Society; Anne Quesney, Director Abortion Rights

Anti-abortionists opposed to women’s right to choose on abortion would like to use the government’s Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill, currently speeding through the House of Lords, to restrict the Abortion Act. Already, Baroness Masham has tabled an amendment to restrict abortion. Other parliamentarians may try to lower the legal abortion time limit from 24 to 20 or even 13 weeks. Any such restrictions would be devastating for women and must be defeated. Pro-choice MPs are also expected to table amendments to improve the law. These should be fully supported.

Please allow plenty of time to clear security on entering the Palace of Westminster and tell the police outside Parliament that you are attending a meeting sponsored by Emily Thornberry MP

The room is wheelchair accessible and has a hearing loop system. Please let us know of any additional access requirements that may facilitate your attendance.

Have your say and get involved – all pro-choice supporters welcome!

Pro-Choice Carnival

Just a quick plug for this new blog/carnival , :

This Carnival aims to highlight some of the best writing on the theme of a woman’s right to choose, and will be published every other month. Contributions can be new or old, long or short, written by women or men, feminists or non-feminists, just as long as the writing comes from a firm belief that access to safe, legal abortion is every woman’s basic human right.

It also has some useful links to pro choice websites.

Perhaps some other bloggers can link to this site and give it a plug.

Hat tip to the F Word.