Abortion in Brazil is punishable by up to three years in prison, and is allowed on only three grounds: rape, risk to the life of the pregnant person, and when the fetus suffers anencephaly, a fatal birth defect. There was a strong likelihood that the Brazilian Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Rosa Weber, would decriminalize abortion in September 2023. However, no more action has been taken on the matter, and the procedure still remains illegal in the country.
After getting a rough idea about the situation of abortion rights in Brazil, it is time to analyze it in terms of securitization theory, feminist critique of the securitization theory, and Biopolitics and the PARIS school approach to (in)securitization.
Ole Waever’s conceptualization of Securitization theory is essentially a speech act. By using this speech act, it implied that all available resources would be directed at obstructing a particular challenge, elevating it to a principled status. Moreover this kind of threat would be characterized as existential and a challenge to national sovereignty. Brazil being a largely catholic state has a pro-life stance thus a large section of the society being against abortion rights in the country. For the longest time the state has viewed abortion as an existential threat to society, thus giving it the power to criminalize abortion in the country. Here the securitizing actors are the political leaders as well as conservative groups, the threat object being abortion rights, referent object being the existence of peace in society and also the religious beliefs, the audience being the citizens of Brazil, the means of securitization being law and order and the purpose being to conserve the traditional, cultural and religious sentiments of the society. What this also does is that it removes abortion from the realm of normal politics and the state gains excessive rights over women’s bodies. There is also a creation of an “us” vs “them” binary between “pro-life” supporters and “pro-abortion” activists.
Lene Hansen critique’s the securitization theory by arguing that the speech act used in the securitization theory does not include gender. She argues that there are two blindspots of the securitization theory. The first being ‘security as silence’ which talks about how insecurity often cannot be voiced. It is difficult for women in Brazil to bring up the issues of abortion laws as it is still considered a huge taboo in the nation. A legal or social backlash may result from bringing up abortion as a security concern, which would only make women feel more vulnerable. Therefore, gendered insecurities surrounding reproductive rights are neglected in policymaking, which is reflected in the "security as silence" dilemma.
The second is ‘subsuming security’ which talks about how security issues pertaining to gender are intertwined with other aspects of individual identities. Due to overlapping kinds of discrimination and a lack of resources, low-income women and women from marginalized communities may face additional obstacles while trying to access safe abortion services. Furthermore, religious convictions can shape opinions regarding abortion and help gendered security issues become enmeshed in larger moral and cultural frameworks, especially in conservative segments of Brazilian society. Gender and other forms of insecurity are intricately linked, which makes it difficult to frame abortion as a security concern in and of itself. This emphasizes the need for a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between gender and other forms of insecurity. Lene Hansen is not completely dismissing the securitization theory but rather critiques it for not being inclusive of gender.
Coming to Biopolitics and governmentality. It talks about disciplining the body to ensure that the body can be utilized to full efficiency. “Power of Life” entails creation of obedient subjects. When these subjects deviate from the norm they can be punished by the state. In Brazil, analyzing it through a foucauldian lens we can see how abortion regulations are a reflection of biopolitical tactics meant to control women's bodies and regulate reproductive activities. In order to maintain the population and uphold traditional family patterns, this involves encouraging births. State’s regulation of women’s bodies is a clear example of disciplining the body. Getting an abortion in Brazil is seen as deviating from the ideals set by the society and is also punishable by law. From the PARIS school perspective security and insecurity are not binary opposite but exist along in a continuum. State’s efforts to regulate reproductive rights aims to secure the life of the fetus and preserve the traditions of the society while at the same time creating insecurity by curbing their reproductive autonomy. Jeremy Bentham’s Panopticon is structured in a way that the prisoners develop a sensation of constant visibility and learn to regulate themselves because they are aware that they might always be seen. Drawing upon this we can see how the Brazilian government's strict laws conforms the women to self regulate and discipline themselves much like the example of the Panopticon.
So in conclusion we can see how the state of abortion rights in Brazil serves as an example of the intricate relationships between power, governance, and social norms as seen through the lens of the Paris School, feminist critique, and securitization theory. In summary, the analysis highlights the complex character of the Brazilian abortion rights debate and the need for a more comprehensive and nuanced strategy that takes into account the ways in which gender, power, and biopolitics intersect.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ole, Wæver. 1995. “Securitization and Desecuritization.” InOn Security, edited by Ronnie Lipschutz. New York: Columbia University Press.https://www.libraryofsocialscience.com/assets/pdf/Waever-Securitization.pdf
Hansen, Lene. 2000. ‘The Little Mermaid’s Silent Security Dilemma and the Absence of Gender in the Copenhagen School’.
Foucault, Michel. The history of sexuality: An introduction. Trans. Robert Hurley. New York: Vintage 95 (1990).
Foucault, Michel. Power: the essential works of Michel Foucault 1954-1984. Penguin UK, 2019
Dip, A. (2023, December 5). ‘The time is now’: Inside Brazil’s fight to decriminalize abortion. openDemocracy. https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/5050/brazil-fight-abortion-decriminalize-supreme-court-lula-justice-weber-barroso/
Comentarios