One of the lesser known facts about the Anti-Abortion movement is that it is not driven by men’s desire to control women or their bodies. The Pro-Choice rhetoric revolves around a woman’s right to bodily autonomy. It also decries the “patriarchal” conceit that stodgy old white men should have determination of what a woman does with her eggs, her uterus and some dude’s gamete cells. But the argument: “hey old man, keep your old-man hands off my fluffy lady bits” is a ruse. It’s bullshit.
The anti-abortion movement is a woman’s lobby group. It’s women arguing to maintain traditional visions of women as natural mothers mixed with women arguing to only allow limited circumstances when it comes to the killing of a gestating human embryo.
Aren’t men also party to this struggle? Sure, lots of them. But they don’t really count, they aren’t in the conversation representing any male interest, they are only arguing either of the two female points of view.
A: “ It’s my body and I’ll do what I want with it, FFS!”
B: “There’s a baby in there too, and you cant just kill babies, FFS!”
Those are the arguments. It’s a fight between opposing groups of women.
Wait a minute, aren’t there some men’s and father’s rights activists saying anything in this debate too? “Hey, those are my sperm cells you’re using. That’s also my child you’re proposing to either kill or give birth to.” and “Why, if I have no legal voice, do I still have a legal obligation to pay the bill for eighteen years?”
Indeed, some Men’s Rights Activists (MRAs) have fielded such commentary, including me. But nobody is listening to us, because we are male. “Shut up, pay up, and you should have kept it in your pants, dude”. This is enough to silence and marginalize the male perspective in the actual argument; which is a fight amongst women.
This is worth repeating. The idea that the anti-abortion movement is men, attempting to control women, is a myth.
The populist rhetoric, “The War Against Women” is a major part of this misdirection. It’s a deliberate and deceptive claim that male interests are encroaching on female reproductive rights. That’s rubbish. The anti-abortion lobby is women, just as the pro-choice lobby is women.
The fight over abortion is a battle between women’s groups. Men in this argument are only supporting players in a political struggle between females. The male point of view has no political currency whatsoever. Men might as well not even exist, in respect to this particular issue.
So, you might wonder why a man is wasting time with mention of the ongoing struggle over legal access to, or limitations on abortion.
While men’s voices carry no weight, men do much of the dirty work on behalf of women in both the pro-life and pro-choice camps.
Occasionally, a clinic providing abortion services gets burned down, blown up, or otherwise molested. Some doctors and other health care workers have been murdered. These occasional arsons, bombings and murders are performed by actors from the “Pro-Life” side of the abortion debate. It’s usually not a woman pouring gasoline on the furniture, or pulling the trigger herself. Almost all violence in society is done by proxy, and men are the tools for women’s violence. Anti-abortion groups committing such acts are organized by women.
Abortion is still widely available across North America, despite visible, vocal, and emotionally-charged female opposition. Despite fifty-nine percent of women opposing “abortion on demand,” Feminism, as the political movement on the side of pro-choice, is just as powerful as it has ever been. The Big-F brand still retains a near monopoly of public discourse over this issue and all gender related topics.
So why do MRAs believe a trending hash-tag, #womenagainstfeminism, matters at all? Feminism has not actually held popular support from women since its inception.
Do MRAs think women rejecting feminism means male suicide or infant genital mutilation will suddenly gain new attention instead of more mockery?
There is an established and uninterrupted silence from non-feminist women on the issues of the Men’s Rights Movement, including:
*anti-male ideology in primary education
*erosion of due process
*disregarding male child sexual abuse
*infant genital mutilation when male
*anti-male college culture
*anti-male affirmative action
*public advocacy of male-targeted-murder
*family court bias against fathers
*parental alienation of fathers
*male reproductive self-determination
*sexual assault of men by women
*workplace death of men
Are any of the women claiming to be opposed to feminism doing anything about college campus star chamber “justice”? Or are they just motivated by the loss of male enthusiasm to be their exploitable resources?
Apparently all it takes to get some MRAs to roll over onto their backs and hanging up their boxing gloves is a few women holding up signs saying “I don’t need feminism.”
Non-feminist women have said they like it when men practice chivalry. So men will step obligingly back onto the treadmill of protect, provide, and die.
Should MRAs just be happy that some women like the guy who climbs that ladder of career and sacrifices himself as her provider? Although she’ll still own him, at least she’ll say “thanks”, which is a little better than being exploited while also being called a rapist.
The Men’s Rights Movement has been, for as long as it has existed, a target for mockery. “Man-babies, small-dick losers, whiney-men, butt-hurt that they’ve lost their ‘privileges'” and so on. The catalog of insults and shaming tactics is well known.
But no female human rights organization anywhere is mourning the slaughter of men or boys in Boko Haram, or anywhere else. The girls in the same crisis, not killed, but merely abducted – that’s who we’re all hearing about in the news. Murdered boys? The world doesn’t even care enough to notice. Women certainly do not give one single, solitary fuck about the humanity or the disenfranchisement, or the deaths of men.
Even some of the women within this movement continue writing about how to game a guy on the career ladder, so that seemingly submissive wifes can enjoy a socialite’s life. How to keep your human appliance happy and productive.
Women like being pampered and paid for by somebody else’s income. I don’t even blame women who practice this particular path to ride-along success by proxy. The worrisome factor is the male plow horses they’ve harnessed who are so easily led that they keep falling for the ploy. But if Men’s Human Rights Activists haven’t yet figured this out, maybe we’re all just too stupid to be worth caring about.
And yet, the world is paying attention to what the mainstream media calls The Marriage Strike. Where, oh where have all the “good” men gone? Women outside the MRM, some of whom have doctorates, are now writing books about it.
The Men’s Rights Movement calls this faction Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW). The difference in terminology is significant. For those selecting a MGTOW path, it is not a temporary suspension of female-favouring self sacrifice. Unlike a temporary strike action, going your own way is not a move in some negotiation for a better contract. It is a diaspora.
It appears that men taking their own happiness and freedom seriously, and avoiding their own coercion and exploitation motivates women to give a shit. Or at least, it motivates them to write a slogan on scented stationary, snap a selfie, and post it on Twitter.
Some women spent almost two minutes pantomiming empathy and a great many MRAs appear ready to climb right back into their traditional male harnesses. Some MRAs are even advocating that the wealth transferral and male-disposing scheme called marriage is a reasonable choice.
They apparently believe the diaspora of men going their own way was merely a temporary interruption of service. Some MRAs even appear to be trying to convince Men Going Their Own Way to treat self ownership as a temporary tactic: Guys, value your humanity just until the owners of men’s identities are more polite about exploiting you.
This doesn’t end with an order for action or even a detailed admonition. But, men’s commitment to self determination, and freedom from illusion, might be a good place to start.