The Doritos ad that showed an ultrasound picture of the baby carried by the baby’s mother was condemned by NARAL for “humanizing the fetus.” It did just that. What else could it have done?
In 2013, Scottish professor Malcolm Nicolson co-authored a book, Imaging and Imagining the Fetus: The Development of Obstetric Ultrasound, published by Johns Hopkins University Press. He noted the “humanizing effect” of ultrasound and the enthusiastic reception it is receiving from pregnant women. In fact, he said, some women report not feeling pregnant until they’ve seen the pictures.
Anti-women feminists such as Allison Benedikt also acknowledge the effects of this technology. In a Salon article in 2012, she lashed out at pregnant women who were sharing pictures of their unborn babies on Facebook. She exclaimed that the more women share these pictures, “the harder it will be to deny that they are people.” She is exactly right: When photos of humans are shared, their humanity is confirmed.
Similarly, in 2007, author Melody Rose published a pro-abortion book wherein she decried the way “recent developments in imaging technique certainly have facilitated a reliance on powerful pictures that humanize the fetus in a way not possible two decades ago.” Imagine how human these humans will look two decades from now!
In 1994, the great English historian Paul Johnson, author of Modern Times, compared abortion to slavery. He noted that advances in medical technology have had a dramatic effect. “The fetus is being humanized,” he said, “just as the slave was humanized.” That’s what worries NARAL.
Contact NARAL’s president, Ilyse Hogue: IHogue@ProChoiceAmerica.org