Tuesday, April 22, 2014

Wiki Assignment Planned Parenthood v. Casey


Wiki Assignment COMM 146

This wiki assignment proved to be a little more challenging than the one I did in COMM 100B. This assignment had an extra component to it, relating it back to feminism and technology. I am particularly interested in law so I wanted to do this assignment on a law case. At first, I wanted to edit the wiki article on Roe v. Wade. Unfortunately, the article was locked and you had to request access to edit it. I am assuming that because of the large amounts of controversy behind it, Wikipedia has taken extra precautions in who can edit the article. So I decided to edit Planned Parenthood v. Casey, another controversial case, tied in with Roe v. Wade. This is kind of the overlooked abortion case and has greater precedent than Roe v. Wade.


The law is a very interesting thing. A lot of people think that it is neutral in all aspects of life. However, a closer analysis of the law shows that it is patriarchal. The Supreme Court has had four female justices in its existence, which means that most of the opinion writing is based on male perspective. Especially with abortion, there is a lot of male perspective. After reading the Wikipedia article on Planned Parenthood v. Casey, I realized that women are not really mentioned in the article. The law treats women as a commodity, something that can be bartered. I sought to change that discourse with my two edits. The first in adding the first paragraph above and then second adding the second sentence in the paragraph talking about the Third Circuit Court of Appeals decision. I wanted to add these two edits because I feel that it brought out a different perspective on this case, that it is not just about whether an abortion is constitutional, but about women, treating them with respect and not an object. The liberty of women is rarely mentioned in this Wikipedia article, if not at all, and I wanted to bring that out.  

1 comment:

  1. You were wise to choose a lesser known abortion case, but one that Wikipedia had identified as important and in need of editorial interventions. The kinds of additions that you made to this case clearly were helpful and have "stuck." I think adding the mention of Alito (and cross referencing him) was particularly significant, given the Supreme Court that we have today.

    ReplyDelete