To the Editor:
In Jennifer Keighley's '06 opinion column ("What a coathanger can mean mean," Nov. 9), she argues that a coathanger is "one of the strongest pro-choice symbols" available and chastises members of the Brown community for not taking this symbol seriously. The problem, however, is not the community - the coathanger is ridiculed because it's just a coathanger.
Although Keighley may associate a coathanger with the "horrific medical consequences of illegal abortions," most people think of it as a convenient method of storing their jackets in the off-season. This innocuous household object will not be changed into a powerful symbol of the horrific consequences of outlawing abortion for the majority of America (or even Brown) anytime soon.
But believe it or not, Keighley herself was not motivated to join the pro-choice movement during a viewing of PBS's "History of the Modern Coat-hanger." Rather, she watched a documentary film that left "harrowing images... etched in (her) memory." It was not a symbol representing sickening sights that convinced her, but the sickening sights themselves. Why she asserts the success of this tactic and simultaneously disdains the pro-life movement's use of graphic fetal images is beyond me.
Ultimately, pro-choice groups should use similarly graphic images for simple reasons - they're effective, they convey a justification for being pro-choice in a way that no words can, and they'll be taken more seriously than the humdrum picture of a coathanger.
Casey Bohlen '08Nov. 10
