I don’t see that many movies these days. Whether it’s because movies have gotten dumber or my free time has gotten more scarce, I’m not sure. But more than movies themselves, reactions to movies tell us a lot about the zeitgeist. They can also highlight great gulfs between the chattering classes and, you know, normal people.
Greenberg, an indifferent movie starring Ben Stiller, isn’t particularly worthy of note. This essay on it, though, is fascinating, at least for those of us who don’t buy the party line that abortion is the gynecological equivalent of having an ingrown toenail excised. The writer’s point seems to be that Greenberg is subversive because it shows a character having an abortion without much reflection or angst. It’s subversive, he implies, because the Powers That Be don’t like depictions of abortion because they stir up controversy.
But there’s a much simpler explanation why protagonists in movies and TV don’t have abortions: most people, including many who self-identify as pro-choice, find abortion to be distasteful, immoral, and less than admirable. It’s hard to care about fictional characters who can be described this way. It’s also, despite attempts to portray it as something less, a life-changing experience – a character whose abortion is part of their story arc will be identified with that abortion rather than with other traits.
In short, movies and TV don’t refrain from portraying abortion because their advertising overlords tell them not to. They avoid it for the same reason they don’t create protagonists who drive while drunk, or adult siblings involved in a romantic relationship. It’s repugnant, on a visceral level, and people aren’t entertained, diverted or edified by things they find repugnant. Given how liberal the coasts skew, the absence of abortion from mainstream entertainment isn’t the triumph of a clique of prudes over the masses; on the contrary, it’s a concession to the sensibilities of the great majority of the population on the part of those who hold radically different views.
Greenberg grossed $4 million. Gigli grossed $6 million. I’m not sure if it’s good or bad that people are more likely to watch Jennifer Lopez’s and Ben Affleck’s single biggest embarrassment than yet another self-indulgent movie about shiftless underachievers.
by 
I saw that movie. It wasn’t very good. It would have been better if it had been about the girl and not the incredibly tedious Ben Stiller character.
Greta Gerwig who played the part of the girl was actually very good and did the best she could with the material. The script was determined to treat the abortion as a bump in the road; because of Gerwig’s performance I left the movie theatre completely unconvinced that was the end of the story for this girl.
I think you’re right about why abortion isn’t shown much in movies. It’s repugnant. Either the character is completely unbothered by the abortion, in which case the character becomes completely repugnant. (And even pro-choice peeps claim abortion is a difficult decision, which women don’t enter into lightly). Or the script attempts to come to grips with the implications, of what happens to a woman after she kills her own child – the story told by McKensie Hahn in the video posted below. Oh. Whoops.
As soon as you try and tell the story of abortion honestly and keep the audience on side with the woman who has the abortion it becomes almost impossible to write a pro-choice narrative.
All the above is right regarding why abortion isn’t shown much in the movies. Advertisers would not allow it, yes. It’s also unavoidably political – and when you are aiming for the largest possible ratings, then being either pro-life or pro-choice is going to immediately make approximatly half of them hate you.
You can’t do abortion in a non-political way. If you have the abortion aborted, it’s pro-life. If you have it without consequences, it’s pro-choice. If you have it with any kind of subsequent punishment for the character – either directly resulting from the abortion (medical complications, emotional trauma) or written in for balance (Relationship breaks up, disowned by parents), then it’s pro-life.
Some British soaps *have* featured abortion-related plot arcs, because we arn’t so hung-up on the issue as the American audience. Emmerdale did one (I think last year) in which a woman was diagnosed with cancer mid-pregnency, and so faced with the choice of either facing probable death by refusing treatment or abortion. You can’t go on chemo while pregnant.* We’ve also got one running right now in another soap in which, in very dramay fashion, a woman who thought pregnancy would break up her relationship aborted only to then find out the accidential father was thrilled at the idea, and a friend already spilled the beans to him. The last I saw she was trying to find a way to either get pregnant again as quickly as possible or fake a miscarriage. I don’t know how that one ended.
*For the curious: She refused the treatment, and did give birth. The daughter remains a character on the show. The woman died of the cancer soon after, in a episode dedicated entirely to her.
“As soon as you try and tell the story of abortion honestly and keep the audience on side with the woman who has the abortion it becomes almost impossible to write a pro-choice narrative.”
Well said, Nicola. This is something that is so very true, and very encouraging for those of us who are pro-life.