Acceptance depends on ideological alignment. I have to reluctantly admit that I am not immune to this phenomenon. Admittedly, I stick to my preferences. A proud liberal, he is a champion of Uris, not Olin, and a firm believer in George Harrison, not Swiftie, but the greatest Beatle. Nevertheless, I hesitate to label myself as critical. Opinions are divided? definitely. Judgmental? I may be an imperfect storyteller of my own, but I believe I am treading carefully along that line.
Their nuances aside, the evolution of “opinion” and “judgment” in our social discourse requires equal scrutiny. In an era marked by stark divisions, there is a pressing need to ask how the operationalization of particular opinions can obscure the perpetuation of oppressive ideologies and spur them into action. do.
As winter break approached and I was preparing for a much-needed “brain break,” headlines about the Alabama Supreme Court's IVF ruling that fetuses are living children flooded my phone. Sometimes I wonder why I remain so vulnerable to the effects of such news. This act was not surprising.
Anti-abortion laws are not, and never have been, about abortion. It's about domination, the continued relegation of women's bodies to sites of degradation and exploitation. The irony of this ruling is clear, and its purpose clear – are even desired pregnancies now under attack?
As a lover of language and its nuances, an advocate of effective communication, and a staunch defender of truth, I believe that unfounded opinions rooted in illiteracy and prejudice have permeated both the political and personal spheres, and now this There are few experiences more humbling than witnessing a more intimate penetration than before. Intertwined.
I scoffed when the Alabama Supreme Court ruled that frozen embryos were “considered children.” I think Italian food is better than French food, and dogs are better than cats. There is a marked divide between subjective antagonism and objective tyranny. The “considerations” promoted by such judgments blur the essential lines between the two, enable overt gender violence, and obscure clarity.
leaderboard 2
I see a troubling pattern in the prevalence of cases like the recent IVF ruling, and in the rationale behind it becoming increasingly rooted in theocracy. It is a movement that seeks to transform subjective beliefs into objective truths. Chief Justice Tom Parker's recent declaration that “every human being is born in the image of God, and his life cannot be destroyed without diminishing the glory of God,” The entanglement of the state not only undermines the basic tenets of democracy, but also diminishes the humanity of women.
We find ourselves at a dire crossroads, where violent affirmations that perpetuate sexist ideologies embed truth and faith in Christian nationalism and strip women of their bodily autonomy. This situation is an oppressively enforced impasse where we are forced into and denied pregnancies that we neither asked for nor could sustain. What we aspire to.
As the female body continues to unwillingly emerge as a battleground for ideological skirmishes, there is little room for opinion or consideration. Unless, of course, the opinion is the woman's own.
Newsletter registration
By succumbing to narrow, in this case Christian-centric notions of individuality and subjectivity, humanity has been observed to buckle under the weight of pervasive arbitrary hubris, allowing unsubstantiated opinions to wield unprecedented influence. Masu. Navigating these turbulent waters requires vigilance against the erosion of fundamental rights and the manipulation of subjective judgments by ulterior motives.
As a creative writer and defender of subjectivity, I am willing to deviate from my usual stance of valuing personal experience as evidence and nuance as a conduit to comprehensive understanding. I wrote this piece knowing this. Paradoxically, however, subjectivity, which once felt liberating, now feels cruel and offers no escape other than to comply with its obligations.
Nevertheless, it is essential to recognize that opinions and judgments are not inherently flawed. A world locked into a sterile perspective of objective, omniscient truth denies the possibility of what ASU professor and former Washington Post reporter Leonard Downey Jr. deems more “trustworthy” journalism.
For those who have not endured pregnancy themselves, there should be no thought about reproductive autonomy. Whether a person capable of bearing a child makes the decision to bear a fetus or not based on economic circumstances, the grace of God, or simply the blatant desire to bear a child or not. It is the sole decision maker who makes the decision as to whether or not to do so. The problem is with the parties involved.
In the wake of the escalation of anti-abortion laws and, more appropriately, anti-women policies, I would like to point out what the recent IVF decision made clear: that subjectivity can destabilize the direction of justice. I have been observing it patiently. When power is left in the hands of those from whom it originates, the original purpose of subjectivity, which was to promote inclusivity and autonomy, is instead used to suppress freedom and eradicate choice altogether. .
Eve Iuro is a second-year student in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences. You can contact her at: [email protected].
