I have not read this paper yet. From Jezebel to Snow White: The shifting representations of women in Canadian anti-abortion discourse seems to take a pro-abortion view and features PWPL in part. One of the authors, Paul Saurette, came to an Institute of Marriage and Family Canada conference once. While he was pleasant enough, I had the feeling at that time that he was not there to learn from the conference, but rather to study… us, as if “conservative pro-lifers” are a subject heading in one of his files.
by 
Pretty uninspiring example of typical academic writing. One examines tropes and rhetorical strategies without ever paying attention to what actually is being said.
Actually, I quite enjoyed reading this paper — thanks for pointing it out. If the authors’ position on the substantive issues is regrettable, I still like their approach to analysis of narrative. I also thought they were particularly on point in their passing insinuation that new pro-lifers, despite their disinclination to vilify women, frame the issue in a manner that ends up being about as “paternalistic and patriarchal” as the aggressive pro-life rhetoric of the 1970s. That seems like just the right description: I’ve always imagined the PWPL bloggers as patriarchs. The article falls short, of course, in failing to pick up on the Communistic tendencies simmering just beneath the surface of this blog’s commentary. That is the truly distinctive feature that makes the new Canadian pro-life movement so refreshing: here we have articulate women blazing the trail as storytelling anti-abortion Communist patriarchs. But you can’t expect one paper to catch on to everything the first time around.
Seriously, I think you all should take it as a high compliment that you’ve caught these scholars’ attention and have intrigued (or maybe even worried?) them enough to provoke this kind of project. And hopefully those who read the piece (all 25 [?] of them, if it’s a typical academic article?) will google the site to take a bit more of a look-see for themselves. If they do, they’ll find a blog that has a nice eclectic assortment of calm, down-to-earth morsels of observation and opinion, not only the magnificent, blistering gems of tellitlikeitism that seem to figure disproportionately in the actual quotes the article provides.
Also if you end up finding the time to read the paper, Andrea, you really should satisfy curious blog readers’ minds by offering your thoughts on it, even if only via back channels.
Thanks for your thoughts, Joel. I do plan on reading it. I have it printed out and will report back when I do. I certainly felt this was an academic inquiry that started with a conclusion. Alas. Will read and get back though.