why do pro-choicers have to be opposed to its message? the message is that childbirth is beautiful and, yes, sexy, and what’s so antiabortion about that? i’m confident enough to celebrate birth without requiring that everyone do it. on the other hand, the position she’s in has a tendency to slow or even stop labor, and no way is she looking so calm while the head’s emerging. and if she’s got all that weight on her arms, no way is she delicately caressing that bear’s ears. has edwards ever seen a woman in labor? this is my idea of a childbirth sculpture: “>http://www.doaks.org/PCWebSite/Slide%20sets/IX%20Mesoamerican/IX%20HTML%20pages/B-71-AS.html>

Edwards has three kids, so, at the risk of assuming too much, he can say he’s seen a woman give birth (ie his wife). It’s an artistic representation of a moment. I like the sculture, particularly the bear rug. It makes me think of the ferocity with which mother bears protect their cubs. The reason pro-choicers hate it is because it shows birth as a natural act. To them, birth is ‘unnatural’ and mothers are not ‘real’ women because they gave up their ‘independence’ to raise children.>

I admire her courage. But having witnessed the process twice before (involving my wife, dear brothers!) I’m finding her countenance to be… well, just a wee bit implausible perhaps. I’d imagine I’d have expected her to expression to be more like… well, something more like the bear’s, I would guess. I’m sorry. I think I’d better just leave it at that. Tah, tah, for now.>

I’m not sure if I can understand why Britney’s fans are upset – unless, I suppose, they disagree with the statue’s alleged message. Personally, I don’t think of the statue as being a particularly good “monument to pro-life” at all. As has already been mentioned, it’s hardly a realistic depiction of a woman giving birth. And I’m not sure why Britney Spears was chosen as the subject – lots of beautiful, non-famous women give birth every day, and to my knowledge there was nothing about this particular birth that might suggest it was any more “pro-life” than any other (i.e. that abortion was considered and rejected). As an artistic rendering of the beauty of motherhood or the divinity of women or however else you want to see it, I’ve got no quarrel with it; I just think it could do without the political message.>

I am prochoice. The pro-choice is about choice, period. I don’t think Britney Spears is a good role model for the campaign…she married and annuled to obtain having sex (versus marrying for the right reasons and working on a marriage), and she then married someone else’s boyfriend (while his girlfriend was pregnant). She got pregnant directly at a young age, and has her own wealth to caretake of her child, but most young mothers don’t have enough money to cope with the reality of a child. Britney has been photographed without using a child safety seat for her baby. Again, not a great role model for the thought of young women having babies. If Britney weren’t self made, she would be in the welfare system, as the father of her child doesn’t seem to have a seperate income from her own income. Again, most young mothers haven’t the luxury of multi-millions of dollars of an income. As far as the sexy pose of that the artist is using, what a shame. There again, using the sex-driven Britney (with the sex-pot persona she has) to make giving birth seem sexy. I have a child, but birthing a child isn’t sexy, it’s a beautiful thing, so I do agree to that, but it’s not sexy. It’s called labor for a reason. Shame on this artist for using sex to sell his material, but yet, smart on the other hand (we are now aware of him). Cheri in Maine>

Is anyone else amused by the irony here? Britney Spears gave birth to Sean Preston via C-Section!>

Why would people be upset that Britney Spears lent her image to a pro-life cause. It’s “her Prerogative”. Like other posters, though, I don’t see anything particuarly pro-life about this statue. Did Britney think about having an abortion? “The reason pro-choicers hate it is because it shows birth as a natural act. To them, birth is ‘unnatural’ and mothers are not ‘real’ women because they gave up their ‘independence’ to raise children.” Oh come on. Do you really believe this or are you just being combatitive (not the first word I was going to choose)? It’s as stupid (oh, there’s the word) saying all anti-choicers all want women to be barefoot and pregnant. They better damned have their husbands paper and slippers ready when he comes home from a hard days work – or else! Whatever!>

She delivered via C-Section? And to think I had mistaken the work of art as an act of courage on her part. Silly me. It’s so sad about that poor bear.>

I am pro choice and that sculpture does not bother me one bit. In fact I rather appriciate the sculpture and the beauty of childbirth that it shows in the work of the sculpture. Pro choice is not anti life. Pro choice is simply a freedom to choose. You know, what this country used to be based on, the concept of FREEDOM. Free will and making choices. We are not against life. The reason people were so put off by this sculpture is because it depicts a naked woman. People are not open minded in general and are very insecure about the human form in a natural state of nakedness. It has nothing to do with the message. Although I do not believe it is right to take away some ones elses freedom to make the “choice” I do find that childbirth is a very “natural” and “Beautiful” part of life and reality. I have 3 children of my own and I have had the unfortunate experience of having an abortion. I believe in my “choices” and am greatful that I have the right to the freedom to choose. I wish I could have a copy of the sculpture in my living room I appriciate the art. I think the artist should create more of them. You go Daniel Edwards!!!>

You’re kidding me, right? I’m with Cheri in Maine on this one. And yes, Britney did have a C-section. And Baaikha cannot speak for me – I do believe childbirth is natural but I can only imagine what would have happened had I not had a C-Section (not exactly natural if you ask me). I consider any woman who truly loves her child (children) a real woman. Why? Because I am one myself. And frankly, I don’t see this as a piece of art. I see it as a piece of publicity. If this guy had wanted the human female body to be represented as beautiful, I can think of better examples of how to do it than this.>

Geez that thing is hideous. Did Spears pose for that thing? . .>

by the way. Prochoice people do not feel that child birth is unnatural or that women who choose to have their baby are not real women. I and others I know believe that childbirth is one of the many aspects of power that women possess. Through her power of sexuality, persuasion and yes even the ability to give life through childbirth. No, childbirth is not “sexy” in the terms of porn but the ability to give birth to another life is very sexy and because this is art it is much like the depiction of the heart shape that represents the abstract concept of emotion instead of the physiological view of the human heart. Sexy is abstract and should not be confused with the idea of physical beauty and the act of sex placed upon women from the collective ideas of society. So, one can argue that childbirth is not sexy much like the heart shape we use when we write I heart cats is not the actual physical form of the human heart. in comparison it is not the same or does it depict the same meaning. I believe this work of art represents both aspects of pro-life and pro-choice. Choosing life is still making a “choice”. I know a young girl who is currently making choices regarding her unplanned and untimely pregnancy. She has chosen to have the baby and she is trying to decide what is best for the baby. Can she keep it and care for it or should she give it up for someone else to care for it. What ever her “choice” may be, I will support her and do what I can to help her through this difficult time. That is Pro-choice. Please dont confuse Pro-choice with Pro-abortion, it is not the same thing.>

Okay, I have to say, the only thing connecting this statue at *all* to ‘Pro-Life’ is the *title.* And apparently someone’s spin that pro-choice people are anti-motherhood (Some might jibe, ‘even for Britney.’ )>

The sculpture – not a particularly good one at that – doesn’t strike me as pro-life, just unrealistic. I’ve had four children – all vaginal deliveries, the last one being 11+ lbs. No mother I’ve ever known who’s given birth vaginally, even with painkillers, childbirth classes, and supportive partners has *ever* claimed to experience tranquility (like the statue’s facial expression depicts) during that process! And as several posters pointed out, Ms. Spears had a C-section, so she didn’t exactly go through the birth process as depicted in the sculpture. I’m in agreement with Rita Clarke regarding it being more for publicity, and could’ve been better represented by another example.>

Frankly I don’t give a rip about what somebody chooses to expose to their own community. It’s not my affair. However I suspect that particular species of bear is endangered. Does her have tribe have an accord, with nations whom it concerns, to hunt such a bear? Surely you realize she’s making a fashion statement.>

I wonder if the statue lip-synchs in concert, too?>

Besides, who in their right mind would choose Britney Spears as a model for ANY movement?>