Pre-Internet: Citizen Ruth

Citizen Ruth: How Media Stereotypes Abortion in the Pre-Internet Era
By Beau

            

On January 22, 1973, the United States Supreme Court made their landmark decision on Roe v Wade, extending access to abortions for women across the country (Vestal).  In the aftermath of the decision, groups on both sides of the argument have become increasingly polarized.  On one side, the “pro-life” party argues that, “life begins at conception and [they] consider abortion tantamount to homicide” (ibid.).  On the other side, the “pro-choice” party believes that it is a woman’s right to choose if they want to terminate a pregnancy (ibid.).  As the national debate ensued, different social forces took sides in the argument.  The Catholic church took the side of pro-life, citing religious beliefs that conception begins at birth, and therefore abortion is murder (ibid.).  Feminists and the Women’s Rights Movement, on the other hand, argued that access to abortions was a fundamental freedom for women (ibid.).  As a result of the different social forces and the positions they have taken on the argument, stereotypes began to form about what kind of person constituted the pro-life and pro-choice camp.  These stereotypes frequently became the way the abortion argument was framed in the media, and any story or writing on abortion often referred back to them.  Prior to the takeover of the internet as the dominant source of media for Americans, these caricatures of pro- and anti-abortion activists became ingrained.  The 1996 film Citizen Ruth serves as a superb example for how the media portrayed the different abortion movements. 

            Citizen Ruth is a story about a young, poor, drug addicted woman who experiences an unplanned pregnancy.  As the story unfolds, she finds herself as the focal point of an intense abortion debate.  Both the pro-life and pro-choice activists believe they know what is best for her and try to sway her decision (Citizen Ruth).  The different characters follow the stereotypes already embedded in the American consciousness surrounding the abortion debate.  Ruth is an irresponsible woman with an unplanned pregnancy, the pro-life group are religiously motivated zealots and the pro-choice group are hardcore feminists.  The depiction of these stereotypes contains ideologies that are both hegemonic and counter-hegemonic in nature.  An analysis of the film’s production and text shows how Citizen Ruth reinforces hegemony in its representation of young women seeking abortion, but resists hegemonic ideologies in its portrayal of pro-life fanatics.

The first question that must be answered is: what was the hegemonic narrative in the pre-internet media culture of 1996? As stated in the introduction to this blog, hegemony is, “the power or dominance that one social group holds over the others” (Lull 39).  This means that whatever group holds power and ownership over society’s ideology producing institutions, such as the media, will be producing the hegemonic narrative (ibid.).  At the end of the 20^th century in the United States, this was predominantly a group of white, male conservatives.  Douglas Kellner notes in his essay on media culture that, “[his] study of television in the United States, for instance, disclosed that the takeover of the television networks by major transnational corporations and communications conglomerates in the 1980’s was part of a “right turn” within U.S society” (Kellner 11). This “right turn” in the media coincided with the terms of presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W Bush.  Reagan, an outspoken supporter of the pro-life movement, said in a 1986 speech to congress, “today there is a wound in our national conscience … America will never be whole as long as the right to life granted by our Creator is denied to the unborn” (Kengor and Doerner).  By 1996 the republican party was intimately tied with the pro-life movement.  As Mary Ziegler notes in her analysis of the abortion debate, “as political realignment accelerated, the republican party began to radicalize as socially conservative.  Evangelized protestants began to mobilize to an unprecedented extent, so radicalizing brought new voters into the party” (Ziegler 1005).  With a conservative media and coming off over a decade of a pro-life presidents, the mainstream ideologies were on the side of the anti-abortion activists.  It should be noted that by 1996, pro-choice President Bill Clinton was in office, but the dominant narrative was still to vilify feminists and women who believe reproductive choice is a right (Miller, et al.). 

The production of a media artifact can largely determine the ideologies it espouses, and it is rare for Hollywood producers to make a movie that goes against dominant social narratives.  Douglas Kellner writes, “media conglomerates control ever more domains of the production and distribution of culture” (Kellner 11).  As previously noted, these media conglomerates had mostly taken a “right turn” in the 1980’s, so it is unlikely that a film portraying elements of the abortion debate in a counter-hegemonic way would be financed by major production companies.  As Kellner notes, the system of production often determines the media that is produced (10).  Citizen Ruth, however, was able to avoid these power structures because it was an independent film.  Independent films have long been vessels for promoting ideologies that mainstream Hollywood would not touch.  In her essay on the Sundance Film Festival, JoAnn Valenti notes, “In documentaries, dramatic, and short films, a hotbed of new ideas and experimental new ways to re-examine old issues have emerged in the independent film world” (1).  While most movies produced by large production companies are confined to messages that will be widely palatable and therefore produce more profit, independent films are not held to the same rigid profit motive.  They often explore polarizing social issues.  Valenti notes, “human rights, politics, and environmentalism deep-six the usual Hollywood fare of glamor, romance, and fantasy. That is what's expected from the independent film community” (ibid.).  This makes independent production the ideal avenue for Citizen Ruth, because it is allowed to portray an issue like abortion in a way that would not satisfy the profit motive of a major production.  It opens the door for counter hegemonic narratives that would otherwise not make it through the production cycle. 

Despite the freedom afforded by being an independent film, Citizen Ruth still depicts several aspects of the abortion debate in a way that reinforces hegemony.  One of the more problematic depictions in the movie is the characterization of Ruth, the young woman who finds herself unexpectedly pregnant.  The opening of the movie shows Ruth having what is inferred to be promiscuous sex in a dirty, run down building.  She then gets thrown out by the man she is with, and after borrowing money from her sister, abuses inhalants in a back alley.  She is soon arrested and the audience finds out this is her 16^th drug related arrest (Citizen Ruth 0:0:00 – 0:11:00).  The portrayal of women seeking an abortion as irresponsible and drug addicted is problematic because it reinforces the stereotype that the only people seeking abortions are people who are incapable of acting responsibly.  This is an old stereotype, and it has its roots in the abortion laws prior to Roe v Wade.  In the 1960’s, one of the easiest ways for a woman to get access to an abortion at this point in time was if she was deemed a psychiatric case (Ziegler 984).  Doctors would often get patients that wanted abortions that did not meet the medical requirements the law deemed necessary for the procedure, so they would diagnose patients with impulsive behavior, and often as having alcohol and drug problems too (ibid.).  This meant that, statistically speaking, most of the women who received abortions did so because of their psychiatric conditions, even if these conditions were largely fabricated (ibid.).  These cases helped to create the myth that the only people who were getting abortions were ones who suffered from psychiatric issues, a myth that continued through to Ruth’s character.  Statistics show that most of the women who get abortions are not young and reckless women.  A majority of the women who get abortions are over 25, and a significant portion of them are married (Who’s Getting Abortions? Not Who You’d Think).  This stereotype of drug addicted, impulsive women being the only demographic to seek abortions is not based in reality. The film also shows Ruth as dressing in a non-conservative way, which adds to her characterization as promiscuous.  She is often shown wearing an exposed thong and applying excessive make up (Citizen Ruth 0:19:00).  This reinforces the stereotype that the women getting abortions are “sluts”, and that if a woman behaves in a conservative, responsible way, it will not be a problem that she encounters.  These depictions of common stereotypes serve to reinforce the hegemonic, conservative narrative that denigrates the type of women who consider an abortion.

Citizen Ruth does not solely reinforce hegemony.  It resists the mainstream, conservative media in its portrayal of the pro-life activists who aim to persuade Ruth to keep her child.  One of the first negative depictions of a pro-life character comes in Ruth’s first visit to a doctor.  She is brought to clinic that is anti-abortion, and when she tells her doctor that she wants to terminate the pregnancy he tells her that she is confused, and tries to convince her that the fetus is made in God’s image so she cannot abort it.  They then show her a shocking and graphic video about how abortion is murder (0:30:00-0:33:30).  This is counter hegemonic because the doctors are shown to not care about what Ruth wants, they only want to force their agenda upon her.  They are not compassionate but saccharine people, and in the end, they resort to shock tactics to try to manipulate Ruth.  This theme of the pro-life camp as not actually caring about Ruth or even the children they are supposedly protecting is repeated when the head of the “Baby Savers” organization flies in to help persuade Ruth.  He has a child who he claims to have saved from abortion, but he treats the child like his butler (Citizen Ruth 1:24:00).  The purpose of this character is to show that the anti-abortion activists are only out to push an agenda.  Even the children they claim to care so deeply for are means to an end, that end being social control.  Citizen Ruth exposes the way that the pro-life activists try to exert power over other social groups, which is the definition of hegemony. 

The abortion debate has polarized Americans for decades.  The issue has evolved from a medical debate into one concerned with religion and women’s rights.  By 1996, the predominately conservative, male ruling class had created a narrative about those who would seek to terminate a pregnancy through over a decade of power and control of the media.  They have spread the stereotype that only poor, irresponsible, and often drug addicted women are the ones who would need an abortion.  In the film Citizen Ruth, this stereotype is reinforced through the main character, but the notion that pro-life activists are in the right is resisted.  The “baby savers” in the movie are represented as not caring about Ruth or even her unborn child, but merely trying to push an agenda.  The depiction of these ideologies helps to provide a road map for how the ideologies that are prevalent today were created and spread.  Understanding the history of these ideologies helps to point out the often fallacious reasoning they are based on, and leads to a more productive and informed conversation on reproductive rights. 

Works Cited:

Citizen Ruth. Directed by Alexander Payne, Miramax Films, 1996.

Doerner, Patricia Clark and Kengor, Paul. “Reagan’s Darkest Hour.” National Review http://www.nationalreview.com/article/223437/reagans-darkest-hour-paul-kengor-patricia-clark-doerner. Accessed 8 March 2017.

Hall, Stuart. "The Whites of Their Eyes: Racist Ideologies and the Media." Gender, Race, and Class in Media, edited by Gail Dines, Jean M. Humez, Sage Publications, 2015, pp. 39-42.

 Kellner, Douglas. "Cultural Studies, Multiculturalism, and Media Culture." Gender, Race, and Class in Media, edited by Gail Dines, Jean M. Humez, Sage Publications, 2015, pp. 39-42.

Lull, James. "Hegemony." Gender, Race, and Class in Media, edited by Gail Dines, Jean M. Humez, Sage Publications, 2015, pp. 39-42.

Miller, Carol T, Robin E. Roy, and Kristin S. Weibust. “Effects of Stereotypes About Feminists on Feminist Self-Identification.” Psychology of Women Quarterly, vol. 31, 2007, pp. 146-156. 

Vestal, Christine. “Americans and Abortion: An Overview.” Pew Research Center. http://www.pewforum.org/2008/09/29/americans-and-abortion-an-overview/. Accessed 8 March 2017.

“Who’s Getting Abortions? Not Who You’d Think.” NBC News. http://www.nbcnews.com/id/22689931/ns/health-womens_health/t/whos-getting-abortions-not-who-youd-think/#.WMDQWDvytPY.  Accessed 8 March 2017

 Ziegler, Mary. “Beyond Backlash: Legal History, Polarization, and Roe v. Wade.” Washington and Lee Law Review, vol. 71, no. 2, 2014, pp. 970-1020.