I have been trawling through some old media articles I've contributed to over the years, including transcripts of radio interviews, newspaper articles and social media commentary and I've discovered a very common theme in the responses of abortion advocates.  Interestingly, the theme correlates well with the stated strategy of many of these radical groups, that is to actively seek to undermine any person who disemminates information about the adverse impact of abortion, regardless of the integrity and veracity of the evidence behind that information.

Leslie Cannold, former President of Reproductive Choice Australia published an article in 2002, 'Understanding and Responding to Anti-choice Women-centred Strategies', where she clearly states her strategy of undermining women, which includes attempts to actively undermine them by making public their 'links to 'anti-choice movements' and beliefs'.   My personal experience of Leslie Cannold in this regard, is that in the absence of such links, she will create her own (see comments).   Sadly this is also my experience of many radical abortion advocates who appear not to be able to accept the views and experiences of women when they differ from their own, none of which seems to me to be a very feminist approach toward other women.

In the commentary linked above, Cannold accuses me of stalking her and her organisation (blatantly untrue and without any evidence), as well as lacking transparency about what I do, also untrue.   Interestingly though, these statements, regardless of their lack of basis are often repeated by others who share her ideology, and usually at a point in time when individuals have run out of rational argument against the evidence presented.

This is the strategy.   Work to shame, dismiss, ridicule and demean both women who speak out about their abortions as a negative event, and those who seek to give them a voice, in any way possible even if this means lying.  This is an abuse of women by women and should not be tolerated.

Whilst many of the social media commentary often constitutes quite personal attacks, the ignorance of abortion advocates in their general discussion about prolife groups, or individuals who simply educate about abortion without an ideological framework, is astounding.

Imagine a worldThis meme that I picked up from the Campaign for Women's Reproductive Rights Facebook page is a prime example of a sentiment that is often used to attack prolife groups.

The assertion being that prolife people never care about women after they give birth.  Of course the facts are that many prolife people provide services of a practical and supportive nature to women who may never have considered abortion, and to women and families in general.  I am yet to see a volunteer pregnancy support service providing free services set up by a pro abortion group, yet there are dozens of them in Australia, and thousands in the United States established by prolife people.

abortion on demandWhilst Cannold herself has denied ever calling for free abortion on demand until birth, the groups she used to spearhead certainly do.

They appear to genuinely believe that the majority of the public support such a step, yet none of the research supports this. In fact, according to abortion advocate's own research, only 6% believe abortion should be available for any reason in the third trimester.

I am continually amazed at how these radical minority views gain such momentum in our media and how the flawed research of so many so consistently misrepresents the majority.