Selective reading, selective interpretation

I really wish people would learn to read what columnists actually write, rather than projecting their own interpretations and assumptions on an opinion piece.

This has happened to me before and usually I let it slide but I’m afraid this time I have to set the record straight because it concerns a very crucial issue.

Commenting several times under my article “Don’t underestimate the power of the female vote”, Paul Vincenti, who heads the Gift of Life lobby group, thought fit to post completely misleading, if not outright deceptive, remarks about what I had written. I am going to reproduce them here verbatim and in full:

“This attempt to turn abortion into a woman’s issue is typical of the International Planned Parenthood Federation’s tactics. Our network picked up that they were active in Malta under a hidden group almost a year ago. Make no mistake, their end game here is to have Maltese women feel it is their right to kill their child. It begins with abortion under the disguise of contraception and then leads to full blown abortion on demand. This is what will happen if these extremists succeed in their plan. Their (sic) is probably collusion on a deeper level than most realise. It may even involve some MPs who are part of the game.”

“When extremist feminism claims to talk in the name of all women, they are using abusing (sic) of pro-life women, who are by far the majority of women in Malta.”

“Treating (sic) the government with the female vote if the politicians do not legalise abortion is typical of the pro abortion militant tactics. Life is not a choice. Babies are not a disease and abortion is not the cure.”

I confess I had to go back and re-read what I wrote because I thought some mysterious gremlin might have sneaked into my computer and tampered with my article from the moment I finished it until I pressed “send”.

But, nope. There it was, exactly as I had written it. You will notice that nowhere did I refer to the issue of abortion, so perhaps Mr Vincenti needs to go to Specsavers. Or maybe he just needs a good dictionary to help him with the meaning of certain words. Either that, or he is being deliberately malicious, insinuating all sorts of things about the motive and real meaning of my article. But how can that be? Mr Vincenti, I am sure, would never do such a thing.

I like to give people the benefit of the doubt. In fact, I was prepared to ignore the comments as I usually do because I never bother to engage with people on comments boards as I find it a very exhausting waste of time which depletes my energy, gets me nowhere and prevents me from getting on with all the other work I have to do. I especially do not engage with people who are determined to draw me into their obsessive need to argue. 

Some may have the stamina to answer and rebut every single thing people say; I have seen long drawn-out online arguments and counter-arguments which seem to go on for hours and even days. Do I have that kind of time? Do I have that kind of inclination? No and no. It’s like wading in a tub of molasses where you will simply be sinking deeper and deeper into a pit of sticky, gooey stuff which will take ages to wash off.

However, after the Women for Women Facebook group was taken down on Thursday because it was the victim of a cyber-attack by those who chose to report it for “breaching Facebook’s terms and conditions”, I couldn’t help but wonder if it was one huge coincidence or whether there were dots to be connected.

His references to “a hidden group” which “claims to talk in the name of all women” and was threatening “the government with the female vote if the politicians do not legalize abortion” need to be addressed, so I am doing it here.

The number of inaccuracies and utter speculation uttered by Mr Vincenti are obviously a deliberate attempt to smear me with the “abortion card” simply because I wrote in favour of the morning-after pill even though the chairman of the Medicines Authority himself has confirmed it is not abortive.

So let me make it clear Mr Vincenti, if I were in favour of abortion, I would simply say so. On the other hand, if I were in favour of abortion as so many Maltese women are, that is called freedom of thought and you have no right to try and use these puerile intimidation tactics.

And if you are having trouble understanding those two sentences, just ask someone to gently and carefully explain them to you.

So no, I have no secret pact with the International Planned Parenthood Federation and their “tactics”. There is no “collusion” which “may involve some MPs who are part of the game”.

Because, using your same argument, perhaps I too should start throwing around wild accusations and insinuating that Gift of Life is in collusion with some international organization and is roping in MPs “as part of the game”.

It may startle and even alarm you Mr Vincenti, but I speak my own mind and no one pulls my strings. Women’s issues have been important to me ever since I was a teenager and became interested in feminism and while I do not have to justify my beliefs or opinion to anyone I find it incredible that after all these years (some) men just cannot handle it. What is it that makes you so scared about women exerting their right to use their vote to best represent their interests? Does it rock the boat too much for you? If so – good. Boats were made to be rocked.

Meanwhile, I cannot help but point out the irony that following an article about the need for women’s voices to be heard, and the statement that united, women have a great deal of political power, there was a clear attempt to shut women up. Obviously, any time someone tries to suppress free speech, the exact opposite happens.

So, anyway Paul, thanks for the free publicity you have inadvertently given to women’s issues and let’s just hope that the women in your life are allowed permission to speak.