Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Catholics for a Free Choice? Feminists for Life? In a society and at a moment in history in which Catholicism and the dominant institutions of the Catholic community are equated with an anti-abortion position, and in which the feminist community and its organizations are equated with a pro-choice position, how do organizations that identify with these communities but oppose their positions on abortion assert themselves? What discourse do they use to frame their identities?
To address these questions, I examine the framing processes of two “heretical social movement organizations” (HSMOs) that are engaged in the U.S. abortion debate: Catholics for a Free Choice (CFFC) and Feminists for Life (FFLA). I define an HSMO as a social movement organization based in an identity community that articulates positions and pursues goals on an issue that are incongruous with its identity community’s presumed goals and values.
The research indicates that HSMOs frame themselves utilizing sub-cultural discourses that exist within their communities, engaging in what Snow and Benford et al. call “value amplification,” as well as boundary framing. For example, using a value amplification strategy, CFFC draws on discourses that emanate from Vatican II to legitimize itself as a Catholic organization. As an example of boundary framing, FFLA contends that, as a pro-woman, pro-life organization, FFLA represents a return to “real” feminism, pointing out that “First Wave” feminists opposed abortion.

Publication Type: POSTER
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Women and girls not only view ideal beauty standards on the internet but now they can also learn about ideal anorexic standards. Pro-anorexia websites are online communities that promote the maintenance of disordered eating behaviors and provide a forum for anorexics to discuss their experiences. The results of a content analysis of pro-anorexia websites will be presented. AWP themes such as unity, diversity and self-empowerment as they relate to the pro-anorexia movement will also be addressed.

Publication Type: Work in Progress
Abstract: This paper seeks to explore the rhetoric used by “pro-ana” (pro-anorexia) and “pro-mia” (pro-bulimic) girls on such pro-ana and pro-mia websites and message boards from a third-wave feminist perspective. The researchers conducted a through rhetorical analysis (or close textual analysis) of pro-ana and pro-mia websites and message boards that were created by and for these girls. The researchers then coded for themes, which will be further discussed in the paper in its entirety.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: Few studies have examined the group of people who strongly oppose abortion yet support the death penalty. Those studies that have investigated the subject show that a punitive orientation toward criminal offenders and a preference for a literal interpretation of the Bible are the strongest predictors of membership in this pro-life/pro-death penalty group. The question addressed in the present paper is whether a person’s gender also influences group membership: Do punitiveness and literalism have the same predictive power for both women and men, or do the predictors vary as a function of gender? The answer to this question is important for public opinion research. Policy implications are discussed.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper argues that the antiabortion movement in the United States is experiencing a process of frame extension (Snow). Taking advantage of key political opportunities, a newer wing of the movement has initiated a reframing process that seeks to step away from the movement’s three-decade focus on the fetus, by arguing that abortion is primarily bad for women. The article advances the argument that the forces within the antiabortion movement shifting the frame are doing so for strategic advantage: by shifting the focus from the fetus to women, this wing of the movement expands its circle of allies to include those moderate observers who are offended by graphic fetal imagery, and who are comfortable with the language of women’s rights and health. Using a data set of key social movement organization press releases and a New York Times article sweep, the piece demonstrates that the new framing effort has been consistent, deliberate, and effective in shifting the public abortion discourse. The ultimate expression of the frame extension’s success lies in the majority opinion of the 2007 Gonzales v. Carhart case, in which the Court justifies upholding the Federal Partial-Birth Abortion Ban because of its perceived harms to women. The article concludes by noting the perils attendant with the new antiabortion frame, as well as additional opportunities that lie ahead for the remade movement.