Lori Andrews argues for a liberalisation of almost all laws which still stand in the way of full-fledged commercialisation of reproduction, including those concerning the human body and its parts and substances. Andrews’ views in favour of “reproductive alternatives” and the “body as property” constitute, in my view, the necessary ideological legitimation for the new reproduction industry, which in its greed for profit has to do away with the integrity of the individual, the human person. Instead, it favours the logic of the “dividual”: a person’s wholeness reduced to saleable and disposable bits and pieces. To me, this so-called liberal feminism is a perversion of everything the ideology of women’s liberation stands for. In addition, I argue that Andrews’ liberalism, which apparently is directed against the “right to life” movement, is in fact not so far removed from it, since both will lead to more state intervention in reproductive processes.
Reproductive and Genetic Engineering: Journal of International Feminist Analysis
Volume 1 Number 3, 1988
From the individual to the dividual: in the supermarket of “reproductive alternatives”
by Maria Mies
http://www.finrrage.org/pdf_files/RepTech%20General/In_the_Supermarket_of_Reproductive_Alternatives.pdf
This article is a critique of papers issued by the Working Group of the project “Reproductive Laws for the 1990’s” at Rutgers University, USA and of two articles by Lori Andrews. My critique, in general, is that the women involved in this project consider the new reproductive technologies as potentially beneficial for women’s reproductive autonomy. The main focus of my argument, however, is directed against Andrews’ position. She argues for a liberalisation of almost all laws which still stand in the way of full-fledged commercialisation of reproduction, including those concerning the human body and its parts and substances. Andrews’ views in favour of “reproductive alternatives” and the “body as property” constitute, in my view, the necessary ideological legitimation for the new reproduction industry, which in its greed for profit has to do away with the integrity of the individual, the human person. Instead, it favours the logic of the “dividual”: a person’s wholeness reduced to saleable and disposable bits and pieces. To me, this so-called liberal feminism is a perversion of everything the ideology of women’s liberation stands for. In addition, I argue that Andrews’ liberalism, which apparently is directed against the “right to life” movement, is in fact not so far removed from it, since both will lead to more state intervention in reproductive processes.