Resonance and Radicalism: Feminist Framing in the Abortion Debates of the United States and Germany

TLDR

Cultural resonance does not guarantee movement success; some speakers pursue radical positions rather than aligning with institutionalized discourses. The authors quantitatively compare 1970–94 German and U.S. newspapers to show how discursive opportunities shape feminist framing and long‑term success, and qualitatively analyze activist arguments to illustrate how mainstream adaptation affects radical voices.

Abstract

Cultural resonance and movement success are not the same, and not all movement speakers seek success in terms resonant with institutionalized discourses—some instead choose to be radical. Quantitative comparison of German and U.S. newspapers in the period 1970–94 shows how differences in discursive opportunity affect both the strategic use of frames in the feminist repertoire about legal abortion and their long‐term success. In Germany, speakers emphasizing women's victimization and natural connection to the fetus become accepted as representing a realistic feminist position, thus mainstream, while those who would destigmatize abortion become marginalized. In the United States, the reverse is the case. Qualitative analysis of activist arguments then shows how this adaptation to opportunity by mainstream feminist speakers affects those who continue to voice “radical” concerns.