My New Girl Crush – Camille Paglia

Camille Paglia’s column in today is a happy standard of intelligence and refreshment.  Seriously, I’ve got a crush.

This paragraph contains my favorite quote:

It is certainly premature to predict how the Palin saga will go. I may not agree a jot with her about basic principles, but I have immensely enjoyed Palin’s boffo performances at her debut and at the Republican convention, where she astonishingly dealt with multiple technical malfunctions without missing a beat. A feminism that cannot admire the bravura under high pressure of the first woman governor of a frontier state isn’t worth a warm bucket of spit.

I bolded that last sentence.  Oh. My. Lanta.  That’s been an argument of mine for ages.  I thought the whole point of women’s liberation was to allow women to pursue their callings and talents in any way, to not be limited by society’s predetermined path for them.  I didn’t realize that being a “good” woman meant you had to follow a specific ideology.  I don’t agree, either.  Last week Gloria Steinem wrote a column about how Palin doesn’t represent what women want.  Steinem didn’t bother to ask me.  Or, apparently, the thousands of other women for whom Palin represents a breath of fresh air and similar values.

I am not attracted to Palin simply because she’s a woman.  I couldn’t stand Clinton.  Why the difference?  It’s the values, the morals, the platform.  It’s because I agree, basically, with Palin’s positions on the issues.  Does it help that she’s scrappy, funny and handy with a hunting rifle?  Well, yeah!  I LIKE that she isn’t a victim.  I LOVE that, in point of fact.  She isn’t going to appologize to anyone that she chose to continue a pregnancy in her mid fourties after she found out her child had Down’s.  I adore that.  Rock on, chickadee, rock on.

Here is another reason I’ve got a girl crush on Paglia, or Camille since she’s now my imaginary friend: her position on abortion.  Though I disagree with her, I’m grateful she’s looking and thinking about it clearly and thoughtfully instead of reflexively.

But the pro-life position, whether or not it is based on religious orthodoxy, is more ethically highly evolved than my own tenet of unconstrained access to abortion on demand. My argument (as in my first book, “Sexual Personae,”) has always been that nature has a master plan pushing every species toward procreation and that it is our right and even obligation as rational human beings to defy nature’s fascism. Nature herself is a mass murderer, making casual, cruel experiments and condemning 10,000 to die so that one more fit will live and thrive.

Hence I have always frankly admitted that abortion is murder, the extermination of the powerless by the powerful. Liberals for the most part have shrunk from facing the ethical consequences of their embrace of abortion, which results in the annihilation of concrete individuals and not just clumps of insensate tissue. The state in my view has no authority whatever to intervene in the biological processes of any woman’s body, which nature has implanted there before birth and hence before that woman’s entrance into society and citizenship.

Thank you, Camille, thank you for stating the obvious.  It is, at last, time to have an actual debate about abortion.  Now we can get down to brass tacks and discuss what really happens, what is or should be legal and what to do about it.  Thank you!

Please go read the entire article.  It is worth your time.

This entry was posted in Commentary, News, Our Culture in Hell. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to My New Girl Crush – Camille Paglia

  1. Dana says:

    Couldn’t agree more re Paglia. There is a disarming honesty to her re abortion, and under that, when you get down to the bone, a dishonesty as well. But she is thinking and that is far more than what feminism requires of its loyalists.

  2. Seneca says:

    There’s a problem with Prof. Paglia’s assertion “abortion is murder.” The word murder is defined as an unlawful taking of a human life. Since a first trimester abortion is not unlawful in the U.S., Paglia’s statement is simply incorrect. This is not to say that abortion isn’t wrong in some other sense, but it can’t be “murder” so long as abortion is legal.

  3. vivianlouise says:

    I disagree. It is murder, that it is currently legal doesn’t negate the moral ramifications or the truth of it. Blacks used to be counted as 2/3 of a man, it was legal to own them. Was slavery right and moral while legal only to fall into grossness when made illegal?

    It isn’t the legal definition that matters anyway. Once you define the fetus as human, a separate human from it’s mother, it can not be anything other than murder no matter the statues allowing it’s slaughter.

  4. Emm says:

    Being a known Pro-Choice person, it is always a debate when I also define myself by continuing with, but I also believe that abortion is killing a child, and could never personally have one.

    I disagree Seneca- murder is murder, no matter if it is legally sanctioned or not. However, I also do not believe that the government has any business regulating the bodies of individual women, and I also give thanks that I have never been a 15 year old (or younger) who has been a victim, of incest, or rape that resulted in pregnancy, had to make the decision to deliver a child whose birth defects would consign him or her to a hellish existence or a myriad of other decisions faced by many who have chosen abortion.

    Do I know and realize that many, if not most abortions are had for far lesser reasons? Of course I do. However, neither I, nor the government should be able to legislate morality to this extent, nor should I be able to tell another woman what to do with her own body. I certainly do not want someone else deciding what I shall do with mine.

  5. vivianlouise says:

    There is the rub, though, isn’t it. (Hi Emmy!!!) My body and the government.

    I see abortion because of birth defects as a form of eugenics. And that’s not without acknowledging that raising a child with birth defects isn’t excruciatingly difficult sometimes. But that’s just it, sometimes. If someone’s norm isn’t my norm does that then disqualify them for life?

    I see the same thing with rape and incest. I can’t help it, the child is innocent of the crime. I really do understand the difficulty, really, I do.

Comments are closed.