Sex Roles

, Volume 73, Issue 7–8, pp 311–318 | Cite as

From the Agency Line to the Picket Line: Neoliberal Ideals, Sexual Realities, and Arguments about Abortion in the U.S.

  • Jennifer KatzEmail author
  • Vanessa Tirone
Feminist Forum Commentary


Bay-Cheng’s (2015) paper on the Agency Line provides a much-needed articulation of how neoliberal ideals are used in the U.S. to evaluate young women’s sexuality. Our commentary extends her important work in two specific ways. First, we describe the Agency Line as it relates to the concept of hegemonic masculinity. Although young women in the U.S. are not afforded the same entitlement to sexual desire or behavioral freedom as young men, we suggest that the Agency Line is used to evaluate women’s sexuality against traditional masculine norms. Second, we explore how neoliberal ideals are used to blame women for failing to control their reproductive functioning. Arguments about access to abortion in the U.S. reveal investments in neoliberalism, although different groups apply these ideals in different ways. Those who oppose access to abortion erase, minimize, or vilify pregnant women in ways that converge with neoliberal judgments of “out of control” sexual activity. Those who support abortion rights describe their position as supporting a woman’s autonomy and control over her body and pregnancy status in accord with neoliberal values of rational choice, freedom, and self-determination. On both sides of the picket line, a focus on neoliberal ideals obscures social, economic, and relational factors that influence women’s reproductive realties. By applying the Agency Line to feminist concepts and U.S. reproductive politics, we provide additional support for Bay-Cheng’s (2015) argument about the impact of neoliberal ideals on young women’s lives.


Agency Hegemonic masculinity Reproductive politics Abortion 


Compliance with Ethics

This commentary was completed in accordance with APA ethical standards. No data were collected and as such no approval for this project was obtained from our institution’s IRB. Please contact the corresponding author of this commentary for more information as needed.


  1. Acton, J. (2013, October 6). The problem with pro-choice rhetoric [Blog Post]. Harvard Political Review. Retrieved from
  2. Alcorn, R. (2013, December 30). The problem with the term “pro-choice” and why I use “pro-abortion” [Blog Post]. Retrieved from
  3. Baumgardner, J. (2008). Abortion and life. Brooklyn: Akashic Books.Google Scholar
  4. Bay-Cheng, L. (2015). The agency line: A neoliberal metric for appraising young women’s sexuality. Sex Roles. this issue. doi: 10.1007/s11199-015-0452-6.
  5. Clark-Flory, (2014, May 27). Inside the terrifying, twisted online world of involuntary celibates. Salon. Retrieved from
  6. Connell, R. W. (2005). Masculinities (2nd ed.). Berkley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  7. Dusky, L. (2011) ‘Positive’ adoption language. Retrieved from
  8. Ellis, R., & Sidner, S. (2014, May 24). Deadly California rampage: Chilling video, but no match for reality. CNN. Retrieved from
  9. Fernandez, M. (2014, January 26). Texas woman is taken off life support after order. The New York Times. Retrieved from
  10. Futrelle, D. (2015, January 24). The British teenager who tried to kill 3 women because no one will date him has fans. But that’s not the scariest thing about him. [Blog post]. Retrieved from
  11. Gavey, N. (2005). Just sex? The cultural scaffolding of rape. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Grimes, D. A., & Stuart, G. (2010). Abortion jabberwocky: The need for better terminology. Contraception, 81, 93–96. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2009.09.005.
  13. Holland, J., Ramazanoglu, C., Sharpe, S., & Thomson, R. (2004). The male in the head: Young people, heterosexuality and power. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  14. Katz, J., & Schneider, M. E. (2015). (Hetero)sexual compliance with unwanted sex: Associations with feelings about first sex and sexual self-perceptions. Sex Roles. doi: 10.1007/s11199-015-0467-z. Advance online publication.
  15. Katz, J., & Smith, J. (2012). Youth with benefits: Sex before the ball and chain. Sex Roles, 66, 807–809. doi: 10.1007/s11199-011-0078-2.
  16. Levant, R. F., Hall, R. J., & Rankin, T. J. (2013). Male Role Norms Inventory – short form: Development, confirmatory factor analytic investigations, and measurement invariance across gender. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60, 228–238. doi: 10.1037/a0031545.
  17. Levy, A. (2005). Female chauvinist pigs: Women and the rise of raunch culture. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  18. Marquis, D. (2001). Why abortion is immoral. In R. M. Baird & S. E. Rosenbaum (Eds.), The ethics of abortion (3rd ed., pp. 309–327). New York: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  19. Matlin, M. (2012). The psychology of women (7th ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth, Cengage.Google Scholar
  20. McConnell, M. W. (2001). Roe v. Wade at twenty-five: Still illegitimate. In R. M. Baird & S. E. Rosenbaum (Eds.), The ethics of abortion (3rd ed., pp. 135–138). New York: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  21. Miller, E., Decker, M. R., McCauley, H. I., Tancredit, D. J., Levenson, R. R., Waldman, J., & Silverman, J. G. (2010). Pregnancy coercion, intimate partner violence, and unintended pregnancy. Contraception, 81, 316–322. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2009.12.004.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Paltrow, L. M., & Flavin, J. (2013). Arrests of and forced interventions on pregnant women in the United States, 1973–2005: Implications for women’s legal status and public health. Journal of Health Policies, Policy and Law, 38, 299–343. doi: 10.1215/03616878-1966324.
  23. Pollitt, K. (2014). Pro: Reclaiming abortion rights. New York: Picador.Google Scholar
  24. Regenerus, M., & Uecker, J. (2011). Premarital sex in America: How young Americans meet, mate, and think about marrying. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Rich, A. (1986). Of women born: Motherhood as experience and institution. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  26. Sieger, K. (2012). A birthmother’s identity: (M)other living on the border of (non)motherhood. In F. J. Latchford (Ed.), Adoption and mothering (pp. 42–57). Ontario: Demeter Press.Google Scholar
  27. Smith, A. (2005). Beyond pro choice vs. pro life: Women of color and reproductive justice. NWSA Journal, 17, 119–140. doi: 10.2307/4317105.
  28. Solinger, R. (2001). Beggars and choosers: How the politics of choice shapes adoption, abortion, and welfare in the United States. New York: Hill and Wang.Google Scholar
  29. Solinger, R. (2005). Pregnancy and power: A short history of reproductive politics in America. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Solinger, R. (2013). Reproductive politics: What everyone needs to know. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Sullivan, S. (2014, July 17). Todd Akin: ‘I should have said legitimate case of rape’ The Washington Post [Blog post]. Retrieved from
  32. Tolman, D. L. (2006). In a different position: Conceptualizing female adolescent sexuality development within compulsory heterosexuality. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 112, 71–89. doi: 10.1002/cd.163.
  33. Wheaton, S. (2015, January 22). Rape controversies return to haunt GOP. Politico Pro. Retrieved from

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologySUNY GeneseoGeneseoUSA
  2. 2.Rush University Medical CenterChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations