'She's The Boss'
As far as I can see, this is in fact the most important sentence in a recent Salon article by one Mary Elizabeth Williams entitled 'So what if abortion ends life?'
In my view it's in a direct line of intellectual succession from the eugenics of Galton, with added feminism, so help us all (but especially the little ones). My own understanding of feminism is that it's perhaps best described as sexual nationalism, and therefore as putrid and divisive as all other nationalisms. To my mind this means that everything that every person who describes themself as a feminist either says or writes which makes its way into the public domain should be treated with the utmost suspicion, as it's very possibly been animated by the exclusionary bigotry which is the hallmark of all nationalisms wherever and whenever they appear.
Although in some respects it's a comparatively peaceful nationalism as far as nationalisms go - after all, you can't really plan on achieving world domination when you shriek at the sight of a spider - it thrives instead on fostering a sense of complete disrespect for that half of humanity that does not automatically belong to your preferred group, and in this it has been extremely successful.
What feminism lacks in physical aggression, it more than makes up for in potential numbers. That is not to say that it cannot be aggressive; the extreme violence encouraged by many feminists against infants in their mothers' wombs marks it as one of the most passively-aggressive, lethally destructive expressions of nationalism that has ever existed. However, although its almost Ptolemaic obsession with the performance of bodily functions is a particularly, well, odd feature of feminism, an obsession with hygiene in its own way not unlike the Nazi fetishes for exercise and naturism, with the undisturbed hygiene of the womb taking the place of the hygiene of the flesh (or the race, if you prefer), the ferocity of feminism's war on the unborn is a really rather sordid and ignoble war of liberation as far as wars of liberation go. It's genocidal violence perpetrated by those who proclaim their disenfranchisement, and demand political restitution for it, upon those who, by any objective standard, are far more disenfranchised than they are. The freedom of self-proclaimed disenfranchised feminists to do violence to those vastly more disenfranchised than themselves - a type of violence which we deplore as bullying when it happens in schools - has been enshrined in law for many years; and still the complaints keep coming, which shows that it's really just like all other nationalisms in that it won't stop until the other side (like all nationalisms, feminism doesn't care who that might really be) is hammered completely into the ground. There is no appeasing it.
Mark Shea is quite right to describe the attitudes expressed by Williams as paganism. There is nothing remotely Christian about a mother electing to kill her children on the basis that 'She's The Boss'. That says it all in a nutshell.
My own view is that although her article is dangerously frivolous drivel, the only real difference between Williams and many other feminists is her candour.