A psychoanalytic approach to ideology as a social psychological mechanism for reconciling our basic drives(the Id) with our social connections(the Big Other/Super Ego) offers a way to think about resistance to reproductive freedom. Specifically, opposing a woman’s right to choice in having an abortion is a way to perform a kind of fundamental sanctity that appeals to conservatives. This comports with the intrinsic cynicism of ideology in that this performance has no immediate cost to those espousing it. Men, specifically, cannot have abortions, so the cost of opposing them is minimal. Moreover that ideological cynicism can easily admit for personal exceptions. So the hypocrisy inherent in privately procuring an abortion while publicly decrying abortion is totally in line with how ideology functions. Ideology attempts to reconcile the fundamentally self-absorbed id, with the social demands of the super ego. As Slavoj Žižek claims “renounce everything as ideology demands, and you can have it all”.(Žižek & Fiennes 2011) Ideology functions as symbols whose meaning changes as necessary to allow the fundamental drives, such as for sex, food and survival, to be realized.
My reasoning behind this analysis comes from the work of two thinkers. Žizek argues for this conception of ideology, as arising from a philosophy grounded in psychoanalytic theory. The notion of sanctity as a category of moral emotion comes from the work of Jonathan Haidt.
Haidt offers 5 categories of moral emotion:(Graham et al, 2009)
- Care/harm
- Fairness/cheating
- Loyalty/betrayal
- Authority/subversion
- Sanctity/degradation.
The first two categories are broadly shared by both those self-described as liberals, and self-described conservatives in the US context. However, the last three values are relatively unimportant to Liberals, while these remain strong moral emotions for conservatives. It is the last of these, Sanctity, that I am attempting to address in this post.
The fetus is portrayed in anti-choice arguments as the most innocent, most defenceless of lives. It has no power or possibility to choose evil or good. It is almost, in christian terms, pre-lapsarian. Indeed, the sinfulness of humans occurs with their birth in most Christian theology.I those terms is fairly easy to interpret the fetus as a symbol/site of sanctity. Thus arises the conservative rejection of abortion, as an attack on a fundamental symbol of religious sanctity.
By opposing abortion as an attack on sanctity, its opponents can claim a fundamental, unassailable commitment to sanctity, a cardinal moral emotion. Though admitting to their fundamental sinfulness, they can assert their commitment to a moral code. At the same time, this commitment requires little personal effort on their part. The effort of protesting is not of the same nature, as its value is achieving honour i.e. personal acclaim.
It requires little personal effort to avoid having an abortion oneself, but protesting it has social rewards.
References
Graham, Jesse, Jonathan Haidt, and Brian A. Nosek. "Liberals and conservatives rely on different sets of moral foundations." Journal of personality and social psychology 96, no. 5 (2009): 1029.
|
Žižek, Slavoj, and Sophie Fiennes. The pervert's guide to ideology. British Film Institute/Channel Four Television Corporation, 2011. |
| |
|---|
