Skip to content
Oops, it’s happened again: our politicians have confused The Handmaids Tale for utopia, and not the dystopia that it truly is.
This weekend, Queensland voted-in the Liberal National Party (LNP) after nine years under the Labor Government. While the LNP is a right-wing party, the new state Premier David Crisafulli, echoes sentiments similar to that of far-right Republican politicians in the United States. He has publicly admitted to voting against legalising abortion in 2018, stating that he “doesn’t believe” in late-term abortions, not elaborating on late-term abortions when required for the health of the pregnant person, or cases of incest and rape. And while he said he would never recriminalise abortion in Queensland, he said he would still allow for a vote on the matter, claiming it to be a ‘conscience vote’. So what does this mean for the future landscape of reproductive rights across Australia?
The debate is taking place right here in our backyard.
In the US, reproductive rights have been at the forefront of political debate, with a few states stripping abortion rights back to almost non-existence in just a few years. Perhaps viewing it as far-removed enough to not have to personally consider, Australians have found themselves witnessing a similar tension grow over here. Unfortunately, abortion rights across Australia remain alarmingly fragile and, after the way Queenslanders have voted, it’s looking like the debate of reproductive rights is no longer a conversation we are watching happen across the pond, but one we’re having in our own homes.
You may be thinking, What business does a sensuality shop have in politics and elections? Let me clear the air by saying that we, Passionfruit, are in the business of pleasure, and that pleasure is political.
Pleasure is inherently political.
And not because pleasure itself has been brought into the realm of politics. Due to the ongoing debates around legislation that involve and affect an individuals' bodily autonomy, sexuality and sexual freedoms, our pleasure has always been on the campaign agenda. The ongoing lack of stability in reproductive rights in our country is just one of the hands pulling our private sphere into public discourse. Because, although Crisafulli did not say he would criminalise abortion in the state again, the mere acceptance that he would allow access to safe abortion go to vote as a “conscience vote”, means that he believes that the autonomy of AFAB (assigned female at birth) people is up for debate, and should be decided on by the public and by politicians.
Politicians have a sordid history obsession with female bodies.
The sexual freedoms and rights of women have been staunchly frozen in place since the Victorian era. Likely, because of an equally stubborn contender: capitalism. Capitalism’s reliance on patriarchal structures for its survival, means that women’s rights and autonomy remain political and up for debate. This reliance seeks to maintain the gender hierarchy: a direct and violent attempt to push us back into the era of the nuclear family. While this may not seem so obvious to everyone reading, this debate of autonomy affects all people with a uterus, not only emotionally, but across all areas.
A hypothetical scenario.
For example, a man could have sex with multiple women in one week, potentially getting all of them pregnant. Let's say that he doesn’t have a means of communication with any of these women, so he remains blissfully (read: irresponsibly) unaware of the outcomes of his actions. His separation from the moral and physical consequences, allow him to continue working on his career and pursuing promotion.
Now, let's say that one of these women, who hadn’t slept with anyone else during this time, had fallen pregnant in a state with harsh abortion restrictions. Individually, she is forced to make the insurmountable emotional, physical and financial decision to travel to a state with abortion access, find accommodation, and go through the harrowing process without any emotional or financial assistance. Let’s say she had all of the same opportunities ahead of her as he did (a promising career, a promotion, a future somewhat free of lifelong obligations, etc.); the consequences fall much harder on her shoulders. She needs to request time off. She needs to pay for the out-of-pocket procedure, accommodation and travel costs. She needs to maintain discretion to avoid judgement and potential discrimination within her workplace.
This hypothetical highlights two important themes.
Firstly, this common scenario perpetuates an imbalanced gender hierarchy, deepening disparities in the financial and professional treatment of each party. Secondly, while the man can be much more promiscuous, he not only gets to walk away with his bodily autonomy without physical repercussions, he is excused from a fear of persecution, having to make the extremely difficult decision alone, or risking his career to undergo a traumatic medical intervention. Additionally, he maintains the privilege of having his sex life kept private.
Those who are forced to carry around the result of one sexual interaction, are not afforded such luxuries. And although this hypothetical woman has only had sex once in the last couple of months, she carries around the shame tied to the idea of the ‘promiscuous woman’ and also abortion. She faces potential discrimination from healthcare workers during this process, from colleagues, friends, and family. Her night of pleasure is thrown into the public sphere and held up for the whole world to comment on.
The debate at your door.
When you’re living somewhere that restricts your access to abortion, when your reproductive rights are up for debate, your entire sexual life becomes political. You aren’t given the same hedonistic freedoms of engaging in pleasure. You may have to make the decision to go on hormonal birth control, regardless of whether it makes you anxious, depressed, kills your sex drive and/or makes it difficult to achieve orgasm. You need to always have extra money set aside for the worst case scenario. You may have to turn down sex that you want to have, purely because the anxiety of ‘what if’, becomes greater than the desire to have sex.
An attack on reproductive rights and freedoms is not secular to that of reproduction. It is a distinct attempt to bring us back into conformity with patriarchal ideals: a system that fails the majority. It is an attack on all freedoms of sex and sexuality, by eliciting a rigid approach to what is acceptable and unacceptable in regards to sex, and not just the act but the way that we talk about sex. It is an attempt to bring those that can birth back into submission, to strengthen the gender hierarchy. It is an attack on marginalised groups, people of colour, and those living below the poverty line who are further impacted by the inequities of restricted reproductive rights. In fact, a lack of access to abortion ensures the repetition of cycles of poverty for the lower class.
A vote on abortion is not a ‘conscience vote’, it is an aggressive act of dehumanisation.
A vote on abortion is to be told that choices around our bodies are not for us to decide. That our bodies must go up to the stand to be debated upon by the whole world, purely because of genetic abilities to reproduce. That those who wish to engage in sex not considered ‘productive’ (with intention to reproduce) deserve to be persecuted and punished through ideals held by white male politicians and the church.
A vote on abortion affects our very freedoms around the act of sex itself. The freedoms we feel to engage in it starts to morph from a pursuit of pleasure and intimacy to a ‘risk’ we must decide we are willing to take. Unfortunately, a risk that falls heavier on the person with birthing capabilities. So yes, as we watch debates about abortion rights take the stage once more in this country, it is a reminder that pleasure is inherently political. And, until those in power stop believing it’s their god given right to debate individuals’ bodily autonomy and freedom, pleasure will remain political.