A thoughtful article on the nature of graphic displays and what they achieve.
I personally believe the graphic abortion photos are necessary, but they only have a lasting impact when there is simultaneously a dialogue with those holding the signs. I’m pretty sure that’s the point of the Genocide Awareness Project presentation–it’s to get people talking and asking questions and thinking about it.
And I don’t actually think these are “shock” tactics. I hate movies with blood and gore just for the sake of it, and haven’t seen a horror movie since a grade five Hallowe’en party (The Watcher in the Woods). (In case you are wondering, my friend’s mother saw how scared I was and removed me–rescued me–to play by myself in my friend’s bedroom, where I was much happier. Oh, and years later, I tried the Blair Witch Project, which was a very bad mistake involving a lot of closing my eyes, plugging my ears and humming The sun will come out, Tomorrow! in the theatre, and that’s the end of horror movies for me, forever.)
But when the history is bloody, then show me the history. When I did Holocaust courses for my degree, there were sections so horrible I couldn’t keep reading. But when it is truth, then bring it on.
Abortion is horrible, therefore the photos and evidence is horrible. Showing what abortion is to an apathetic public is not a shock tactic, for shock’s sake alone. I support it.by