Fetus Posters Display Beauty, Not Intimidation

To the editors:

The panicky criticism of Harvard Right to Life (HRL) by Arianne R. Cohen ’03 (Column, “‘Little Natalie’: A Poster Fetus for Intimidation,” Dec. 16) is the most ridiculous column I have read since her gender theory of terrorism 15 months ago. Did the similar pre-natal pictures in the Nov. 11 edition of Time Magazine (“Inside the Womb”) also constitute a misogynist attempt to scare pregnant college students? If Students for Healthy Babies had produced posters with the same images and captions as HRL but with an added reminder to “Take Folic Acid!” would Cohen have opined? Publicizing scientific facts about when fetuses develop their bodily systems cannot be reasonably construed as “inflammatory.” Equating pictures of developing human fetuses with “a vicious attack on women” or “intimidation” defies logic. On the contrary, such images are a beautiful celebration of maternity and early human life, worthy of an art display (I’d suggest the halls of the Committee on Degrees in Women’s Studies). Few things are less intimidating to me—or more uplifting of womanhood—than a picture of a baby and the mother who carries her.

To inform is not to “intimidate.” And there are worse things than guilt. Bravo to HRL for so poignantly humanizing the unborn. Perhaps that is what Cohen actually finds so offensive.

Brian C. Grech ’03
Dec. 17, 2002

The writer is president emeritus of the Harvard Republican Club.