Dating an Abortionist ‘Can Be Cool,’ Claims Writer of WaPo Column
Opinion peddler has gone so far as to tattoo a coat hanger on her arm in response to the presidential election
Plenty of pro-life conservatives would beg to differ with an incredibly crass and pompous assertion, but dating an abortionist can now be considered “cool,” as suggested in a recent Washington Post editorial.
“An unexpected side effect of the 2016 election is that many people have become vocal about their support for reproductive rights. Suddenly, dating an abortion provider can be cool, a way to proclaim one’s liberal street cred,” Colleen Krajewski, an abortion provider, wrote in a controversial opinion piece published July 10 in The Washington Post.
The gynecologist lamented her personal struggles and the negative feedback she has received as one who performs abortions.
“There’s always a reaction. Every man I have ever dated — no matter how liberal or open-minded he professes to be — has flinched, looked away, or gone silent when I first tell him what I do,” Krajewski wrote.
The doctor strained to mention the tattoo she has on her right forearm: The image of a coat hanger is accompanied by the words, “Never again.” She said she got the tattoo one month after the election of President Donald Trump.
Krajewski is an assistant professor at the University of Pittsburgh and a medical adviser at Bedsider, an online birth-control support network. Her article was entitled “I used to be quiet about the fact that I perform abortions. Now I’m upfront.”
“In the past, I’ve tried every strategy: Burying references in my online dating profile; waiting until the third date to talk about the specifics of my work; carefully dropping the word ‘abortion’ in conversation and watching for a reaction … From now on, unless I was in long sleeves, everyone I met would see my tattoo the moment we shook hands — at the office, at parties, in the supermarket, on first dates.”
Time to pause and reflect on what such an article — and the prominent publication of it — says about today’s culture. For starters, it appears to try to glamorize an industry that has claimed the lives of millions of innocent babies, harming many woman psychologically and emotionally in the process for years to come.
But more than that, the piece tries to demonize the very human and natural negative reaction to the idea of abortion in the first place.
This is not the first time this writer has aired her views. In 2014, Krajewski wrote in a blog post for the Huffington Post: “It is my privilege to provide comprehensive reproductive health care … It is my place to empower [a woman] to make a decision that’s in line with her priorities.”
Not all women’s “priorities” and values are the same — not by a long shot. While Krajewski may see her job as “empowering” women, she also should not use her job or her political stance to lure women into having abortions.
Instead, Krajewski’s controversial assertions should empower more men and women to speak out about the value and importance of life. While plenty do speak out, of course, no one should feel tentative or shy about disapproving of a brutal procedure that takes a human life. What if all pro-lifers were more “up front,” as this woman claims to be, and did not remain quiet about their views on abortion?
The clear media influence that plays into today’s cultural attitudes about abortion is especially striking. The Associated Press, which puts out a widely read and followed style guide for publications, recently announced new guidelines for terms associated with abortion and life. In addition to instructing journalists and writers to use the term “anti-abortion” instead of “pro-life,” the AP Stylebook also advises journalists to avoid using the term “abortionist.”