Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1347847
I have been reflecting on why some Maltese anti-choice persons publish such unpleasant, if not actually hateful posts, on social media. Conventional wisdom is that we are highly religious as a nation and that since we believe that life begins at conception, we cannot but also believe that abortion is always morally wrong. While I disagree on the issue of when life begins, what I do not understand is how it is possible for some of those with such strong religious views to en- gage in offensive posts in respect of people like myself and my pro-choice colleagues. Based on my reading about the psy- chology of moral convictions I have come to the conclusion that strong but unchallenged moral convictions are not necessarily a good thing. Mor- als are the basic rules of interperson- al conduct that we believe everyone ought to follow, such as for example, not physically harming anyone unless there is extreme provocation. Moral conviction therefore is the subjective belief that something is fundamentally right or wrong, i.e., either moral or im- moral. Most of us think of moral con- victions as a good thing. For example, we have libraries and social security benefits because those who came be- fore us acted upon their moral convic- tions about the importance of educa- tion and the wellbeing of society. There is evidence that people gen- erally believe that their moral convic- tions are objectively correct. So, for example, for those who are anti-choice on abortion, the idea that abortion is wrong is as obvious to them as one plus one equals two. They do not need an expert to explain this, and indeed would question any authority try- ing to convince them otherwise. The common message in all anti-choice online posts, comments and letters to the newspapers is "Why can't the pro- choice people see what is so obvious (i.e., that abortion is evil)?" In other words, they perceive the immorality of abortion to be a fact when actually it is a matter of their subjective state of mind and what they attach moral sig- nificance to. Research shows that people do not trust authorities to get it right when they have strong moral convictions about the possible outcomes. This ex- plains why most gynaecologists on the island follow international guidelines when it comes to the management of all medical conditions except abor- tion. It makes no sense, until you re- alise that these experienced doctors have strong moral convictions that interfere with their clinical judgement. Moral convictions have this intuitive power that makes them feel as if they must be true, in other words they feel self-evidently true. It feels obvious to them that the correct outcome is their position. It follows that anyone who holds the opposite view must be wrong. Here I must clarify that my per- sonal moral view is that women should be given the choice of whether to have an abortion or not. Other pro-choice activists may have different views, but for me the important moral point is the choice, not the actual abortion. Moral convictions involve subjective states of mind, which is why you can be morally offended by something that I find unobjectionable. Unfortunately, when we are in the grip of our mor- al convictions, we tend to forget that what we are experiencing is actually subjective. Our convictions feel objec- tively true, very much like saying that the earth is round. Moreover, this il- lusion of objectivity leads to the false conclusion that what you experience as morally correct cannot just be true for you, but it must be true for me too. Research in fact shows that we tend to believe our moral convictions are not only true for us and our circum- stances, but also for everyone, every- where and at all times. So those who believe that abortion is morally wrong will also believe that it was morally wrong 100 years ago, and that it is not only wrong in Malta but also every- where else. Unfortunately, most people have not done enough independent research to back up their strong moral con- victions. They are sadly uninformed. The feeling that one already knows everything that one needs to know is based on a strong emotional reaction to the topic rather than any facts. It would seem that once the moral con- viction has developed, a bias kicks-in that pushes us to collect information that supports our conviction rather than challenge it. Rather than hitting out because you disagree with me, let us try to under- stand each other's moral views. As a doctor for choice, I believe that wom- en have the right to choose what hap- pens to their body, and that includes abortion. You have every right to disagree with me, but what I ask you to do is to please look at this issue from a dif- ferent angle. Do so with curiosity and an open mind. Look for the evidence. Read something that challenges your belief that abortion is always morally wrong. Reflect on the pros and cons. You might just realise that you have reached your conclusions without needing much by way of evidence. You might realise that the strength of your feelings is not enough to convince you that what you are feeling is true. You might just learn something about yourself. household chores and caring for children and other dependent adults than men. On the other hand, women are spending less time on personal care and on leisure ac- tivities. The findings indicate that the pan- demic has reinforced the traditional gender stereotypes. There are many lessons which need to be unlearnt – domestic chores should not be automatically solely assigned to a female; sharing and communication are key. Role models in textbooks and on social media, including both explicit and covert educational messages can go a long way to eradicate gender stereotypes. The NSO's News Release of last year's Women's Day provides a snapshot of where women in Malta stand. Data which revealed dismal results in terms of gender equality index, high number of females likely to be at-risk-of-poverty, an employment gender gap of 20% and a gender pay gap of 11.7%. These statistics reveal a worrying situation which is both the cause and the effect of gender inequality. Gender equality is not possible without financial equality. Fur- thermore, statistics also show that although there are more female professionals than males, the percentage of males in manage- rial roles is higher than that of females. De- cision-making roles are still a male prerog- ative in Malta. A multi-pronged approach is needed to address this inequality which should be spearheaded by the government. The government has the resources to do this, and unless it is a feminist government in name only, this inequality should be ad- dressed imminently. Women's Day will serve its true purpose when the need to celebrate such a day is gone. We can hope that one day, gen- der will no longer be a determining factor when choosing what to celebrate. Till then, Women's Day will be a reminder and a mo- tivator for all of us, of our obligation to fight gender discrimination in all its forms, for the benefit of women and for the benefit of the whole society. Prof. Isabel Stabile is a member of Doctors for Choice Prof. Isabel Stabile Graziella Attard Previ is President MNPN and a PN candidate 13 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 7 MARCH 2021 OPINION Challenge your moral convictions Decision-making roles prerogative Most people have not done enough independent research to back up their strong moral convictions. They are sadly uninformed. The feeling that one already knows everything that one needs to know is based on a strong emotional reaction to the topic rather than any facts Far from the rights which are entrenched in laws, often, the everyday lives of most women are fraught with inequalities