Sunday, July 07, 2013

Objections on monitor may be closer than they appear

I get really pissed off at the Big Daddy Theocrats for their vagina control obsession on the one hand.

[Nick Anderson cartoon]

On the other hand I want to believe their overreach is going to generate a backlash among women voters of every ideology come 2014 that will surprise all the pundits. So there's that...

[cross posted at The Impolitic]


nancydrew said...

I can't believe these people don't see what's looming ahead. Any of them talk to their wives? Daughters? Sisters, mothers? Years now of patronizing insults, but hey, not to worry. Servile, obedient Bible-toting women will rescue them from themselves at the ballot box? Because *pre-born*.

Don't think so, fellas.

Victor said...

Not just the men, but the women around these men, all agree that doing this is the right thing to do.

These, of course, are all the same people who thought Mittens & Paulie had the election in the bag, because everyone around them, agreed that they did.

You never lose an argument inside an echo chamber.
But you don't win too many, when you exit it.

aimai said...

You never lose an argument inside an echo chamber.
But you don't win too many, when you exit it.

So good I needed to highlight it, bold, underscore, and italicize it. I dont know enough html to do it so I'm just copying it so it appears twice.


Victor said...

Thank you for the compliment. :-)

FSM knows, I appreciate what you write, ALL of the time.

Libby Spencer said...

Hard core fundies notwithstanding, I have some real hope this will backfire in much bigger way than anyone is currently anticipating.

aimai said...

In regards to Libby Spencer's point (great posting this weekend, btw!) I almost think the backlash has to happen sooner, rather than later, if it is to happen at all.

The problem for the backlash is that if younger women wait too long to react we will have an entire generation growing up who does not actually know its possible to have more liberal abortion laws/medical coverage at all. The poorest women, the ones most at risk from the early Hyde Amendment style attacks on choice, are generally not the most active voters or politically on the offensive while middle class white women and rural women (who might fall into either category) were not affected. Now a huge swathe of rural white women (on government assistance for health care or too poor to access private health care) are going to be affected by these new laws as well as younger women in cities and in university towns--but are these groups going to be politically active enough to create a big backlash?

I'm concerned that the link, for women, between political activism and health care access is not clear to younger women, and that the ability to be politically active is not there for poor women, and that in a generation or two women will have lost awareness that they ever had liberal rights to choice.
We need to strike soon, and hard, and organize hard in an alliance between older voting women who are not right wing nutcases and younger women. Before older activists cease to be active or die off.

Victor said...

I'm an older white guy, and I think that ever since Roe, there's been some complacency coming from the younger generations - particularly women.

Gosnell's butcher shop is a front-pate news outlier, today.

People like him were not news, pre-Roe.
They were a dime-a-dozen in cities and surrounding towns.

And I'm pretty sure that in rural areas, there was someone around who knew a trick or two, about how to induce an abortion.

I think they our religious righties believe there's not enough shame, in a simple, safe, and sanitary modern abortion.

And shame is what sustains these people - not love, not peace, and not kindness.
They live, to feel morally superior to others.

Libby Spencer said...

Thanks for the encouragement aimai. I agree this is a battle that needs to fought early, hard and decisively. Admit I'm pinning my optimism on the women's vote. I'm an old activist myself. I really can't believe we're fighting these same battles again, but I know a lot of women like me who aged out of direct activism on women's issues for a time and got re-energized by the overreach. Hoping it's going to be enough to win this fight all over again.

I'm encouraged to believe it's possible when I see the turnouts in Texas and North Carolina. Women, and the men who support our rights, are rising up. So there's that.

Examinator said...

Au contraire ladies it's not just women poor or otherwise involvement is needed.
To me it isn't just a women's rights thing IT'S a HUMAN RIGHTS issue. Remember women at best, are only about 50% of the voters and many of them are either don't agree with you or are not willing to get involved in
“radical” activities and all the badgering and criticism won't change anybody.
History tells you hat radicals start an issue but it takes the majority of people to push it through. Female emancipation if you want to call it that got high gear during ww2 because the women were doing 'men's jobs' women were never going to go back to as it was . It is a political reality that it's easer to stop something than taking away a right once given. Strewth the 'fire arm' lobby is a clear case in point. i.e. Aus never hat the gun tot'n right so it was easier to control it. Look at Gay marriage once it was allowed the head of steam rose to a point whereby people straight and gay owned it on that front the conservatives are in defence mode hence 'D' in Doma.
Even the 60's the advancement was for CIVIL rights not Black rights. Everyone was covered by civil .
By making the issue a female one or a 'feminist' issue you are excluding others from ownership of the problem and the solution.
* this is not schtick but, Marketing 101 and simple math* .
Fair questions would be
Where is the male anger ?
How do we draw IN the marginal voters
My hard stance is and always has been is to ask “ How myopic do we as a community have to be to NOT see that this effects all sexes/colors?” .

Anybody want to argue that it right to choose doesn't have a wider (albeit more subtle but not less critical) effect on everyone?
Try counselling on a crisis line for a week or two... you'll be surprised how many non feminist women, children (siblings) , boyfriends , husbands etc. raise the issue.
In conclusion I'm aware and sympathetic to the issue I just think on Marketing terms the approach is too narrowly aimed and would recommend a better more inclusive campaign (Beyond MY Virgina mentality).
But then again I'm only a 30 year veteran of marketing and Rights campaigning and volunteer crisis intervention counsellor oh yes ... a male (not that my gender means squat)