Author Archives: KS

I’ve started a new substack, where I’ll be writing about a broader range of topics in philosophy, feminism, and social constructivism. Check it out!

The concept of men ‘deserving’ the right to a paper abortion has received a lot of popular attention and it is frequently brought up in forums like Reddit and Twitter. Usually, it is framed as something that is “only fair” if women get the right to choose an abortion. The popularity of the concept of paper abortion means it deserves feminist scrutiny. Does society need to grant this right to men if women are “allowed” elective abortion?

Reply to Adelstein’s steelman of pro-life arguments.

“If pro-lifers got their way, a teenager who used abortion pills to end her pregnancy after a rape would face greater punishment than her rapist!” This statement has spread rapidly through pro-choice groups; it is typically used to galvanize pro-choice people by suggesting pro-life ethics lead to obviously monstrous moral conclusions. In response, many mainstreamContinue reading “Should Women Face Murder Charges for Abortion? If You’re Pro-Life, The Answer is Yes.”

The imminent reversal of Roe V Wade has caused considerable debate in feminist spaces about the best way to advocate for abortion rights going forward. To the surprise of many pro-choice philosophers, some feminists (including some prominent feminist philosophers) have responded by arguing that feminists should not engage further with discussions around the ethics ofContinue reading “The Feminist Case for Debating Abortion Ethics”

One of the more popular pro-life arguments challenging the morality of abortion is the “Future Like Ours” argument, explained in this famous paper by Don Marquis. Don Marquis argues that the wrongness of killing lies in the way it deprives an entity of a future it will value. Importantly, Marquis’ argument suggests that beings thatContinue reading “A Rebuttal of the “Future Like Ours” Argument Against Abortion”

In his blog post “What if it Really is About the Babies? On Anti-Abortion Motivations“, pro-choice philosopher Nathan Nobis critiques the popular feminist sentiment that abortion restrictions are motivated by a desire to control women rather than to save babies. He writes: [Pro-choice people’s] suggestion is that anti-abortion advocates are not really concerned about stopping embryos andContinue reading “Are abortion restrictions about controlling women? A response to Nobis”

A few pro-life readers responded to my earlier post refuting fetal personhood with a couple objections that I felt were important to address. Pro-life Objection: Argument From Modal Personhood This objection hinges on the idea that there is a critical moral difference between the potential of a gamete and the potential of a zygote, evenContinue reading “Modal Potential and Animal Persons: Responses to More Philosophical Pro-Life Objections”

Discussions of the ethics of abortion and fetal personhood can sometimes break down because pro-life and pro-choice debaters often focus on abortions at different stages of pregnancy. Pro-life proponents often speak of abortion as if it were always taking place at the end of pregnancy, while pro-choice advocates often speak abortion as if it wereContinue reading “The Ethics of Later Abortion”