are thus not required to make any sacrifices . Markowitz uses this to justify abortion , but there are further connotations . Cisgender women are under no obligation to remain women , as doing so will perpetuate their oppression . The Impermissible Sacrifice Principle and the Feminist Proviso inadvertently grant cisgender women permission to change their gender . Moreover , since Markowitz herself aligns with the idea that gender is merely a social construct , 22 it does not make sense for her to then exclude gender minorities from her argument . In fact , it seems contradictory .
It seems many of the complications lie with the Feminist Proviso . It may be possible to make alterations to this principle to make provisions for gender minorities . In the next section , I will discuss this .
Are there Solutions ?
The Gender Based Defence of abortion must be modified if we are to include gender minorities . First , we must remove the Feminist Proviso entirely . Then , if we return to the Impermissible Sacrifice Principle , it states that members of a systematically oppressed group should not be required to make sacrifices to exacerbate their oppression . Gender minorities already suffer oppression , so we could create a different proviso for them . If we do so and combine this new proviso with the Impermissible Sacrifice Principle , then gender minorities are no longer required to make sacrifices to exacerbate their oppression . This includes continuing an unwanted pregnancy . There are unfortunate implications for Markowitz ’ s Gender Based Defence , as the Feminist Proviso must be removed to make way for another proviso and of course , this has disastrous consequences for cisgender women who will no longer be guaranteed an abortion because of the above revisions . Regardless , when supplemented by a proviso stating that gender minorities are a systematically oppressed group , it is possible the Impermissible Sacrifice Principle could still stand , if only to honour the right to reproductive
35