The film covers the activities of the criminal organization MLAC, the Movement for Freedom of Abortion and Contraception, which acted in violation of the laws in France between 1972 and 1974, when it was possible to get a real prison sentence for performing clandestine abortions. The focus is on the story of Annie, a wife and mother of two children, who, having made an abortion in MLAC, suddenly becomes an “activist” of the organization.
The film about the “anger” of a former mattress factory worker is interesting because it is a vivid example of pure liberal propaganda. The film deliberately excludes and cancels any reality that does not fit into the extremely primitive ideology of the MLAC: “Abortion is the right of women only, abortion is good.” Somewhere behind the scenes, Christina, Annie’s friend, goes for an underground, criminal abortion and dies. There was a lot of blood there - I'd love to see that bloody death in the film, as well as the embryos pumped out by the bicycle pump, because I want to see the truth. But, of course, nothing will be shown to us so as not to tarnish the purity of ideology.
This purity, in addition to medical reality, can actually violate a lot more. First, the presence of a subject with a contrary opinion. Therefore, there is no such subject in the film - the film is limited to showing some newspaper articles, but does not even try to mention the public debate in the National Assembly, which lasted more than a day. Second, the children of the deceased Christina – they probably cried when they heard from their father about the death of their mother. Of course, we won't be shown crying babies at funerals, that's also the principle of cleanliness. How many children have lost their mothers because of MLAC? Third, the experience of a woman who came to have an abortion. Madame Minister, who took up the liberalization of abortion in 1974, said that abortion is always a great misfortune for women. But not for Annie, who after an abortion cries with joy and thanks for the song she was sung while pumping. And not for a MLAC member who says they do beautiful things and turn shameful into noble. Where the minister's opinion in the film is, apparently, impure. Fourth, the historical context is that the film is limited to a time when the likes of MLACs could play the role of victims, when they could be arrested and tried. "It's bad ... I'm doing very badly," a woman cries during an abortion. There is moral pressure on her: no, Annie tells her, that’s good, that’s right. The word “bad” is said to be “good”, the word “wrong” is said to be “right”. In 1993, a law will be passed, which in its current version punishes two years in prison and a huge fine for the opposite - for "moral pressure" to discourage a woman from having an abortion. Of course, in the film, such MLACs will not be presented as executioners - this also violates the purity of the picture.
To prove the film's lies, in fact, can be a simple quote from the director: "Usually in films abortion is shown as something traumatic and cruel ..." It was important for me to show something different; in fact, abortion can be a relief.” (I mean, it's an injury, especially for Christine.) In fact, it is clear that the effect of "relief" here serves every frame and no other reality should not disturb it.