Well. I sure wish this was a rare, outrageous type of story, but if you’ve been near a TV or computer lately, you should know the debate about women having control over the course of their own lives is being hotly contested in none other than SCOTUS. And Florida just lost a round in this battle like a raped coed who can’t convince the cops she isn’t a conniving She-Demon making false allegations.
The same building codes that Sammy Bee and John Oliver just did segments on have been halted in a short order handed down by the Supreme Court. Right now, as we all know, the bent of the Supreme Court is in the air and hideously polarized after Jon Stewart smothered Scalia in a frustrated funk caused by the irrelevancy of the show he passed on. Maybe he’ll head on to Florida and see to Rick Scott as well.
The Voldemort-headed decider of women’s fates is expected to ram through the same photocopied ream of building codes which would remove access to care for most of Florida’s female residents. Ironically, closing these clinics would negatively impact women’s health as a whole and clog emergency rooms with patients who could have been served better at clinics that have been closed. In fact, for someone who is very concerned about revenue, this bill would incur massive costs not far down the road. Many women seeking abortions (most done with a dose of medication) would end up having babies that would then suffer because of Scott’s other policy stances. Some children born would become wards of the state, some would cause the death of the mother, some would not live long after birth – all because women wouldn’t have adequate prenatal care. Then there’s the specter of home abortions. But the most baffling effect he is wittingly or unwittingly having on women is keeping birth control methods away from them.
It seems he wants women pregnant, but only if they don’t want to be.
The scale is tipping away from the anti-choice movement. For instance, have you noticed an increase the term “anti-choice”? The next justice confirmed might continue the compassionate work that so many Americans do in clinics, at their own monumental risk, or cement our country as a bigoted theocracy for the foreseeable future. However, the consequences of poor reproductive services will quickly bring the issue back to the fore.
Have hope. Women are finding out that they get to say who does or does not tamper with their destinies, and that toothpaste will never fit back in the tube.
In recognition of the Super Sunday victories of Hillary and Donald Dumpf, I finally read Men Explain Things to Me by Rebecca Solnit. The title is but one of the essays in this collection of musings about the status of women as we stand today – all around the world as well as in America. But it was this one that got my dander up the most because she addresses the basic nature of the “war of the sexes.” We tend to compartmentalize different women’s issues into separate institutions and causes. Domestic violence, all manner of rape and harassment, as well as reproductive freedom should be addressed as stemming from the root issues we don’t hear about: credibility and agency.
Credibility is the crazy idea that a woman’s word should be taken as legitimate before it is run through a barrage of doubtful questions. Solnit writes that she once had a dinner with a boyfriend’s father. He told of an incident in his neighborhood (in Oak Ridge, TN apparently) when a neighbor’s wife ran into the street naked one night screaming that her husband was trying to kill her. He was merely bemused. Mrs. Solnit asked how he knew her husband wasn’t trying to kill her and he explained that they were simply respectable people. So, to him, the more credible possibility was that the woman was crazy.
If you or anyone you know has been sexually assaulted or harassed on the job, most of the battle towards justice is getting authorities to believe you. Even your first brave outcry is met with questions about the nature of your relationship with the offender and whether you have a boyfriend or husband. Apparently cops think women are prone to crying rape after a consensual encounter so their partners won’t get mad if they find out.
“Credibility is a basic
But on a less extreme level, “Men explain things to me, and other women, whether or not they know what they are talking about. Some men.” Every time I am in a discussion with men about a man subject – such as policy, religion, or science fiction/fact – I have a creeping feeling that most are biding time before they can speak again and they have gone to whatever white noise space in their giant heads they go to when a woman opines. That is, after I have yelled them down enough to listen to me. Frequently they don’t care for my sass.
My least favorite man-phrase is “Okay. Hmmm. I’ll buy that.” As if I am possibly selling some sort of snake oil instead of describing a lucid idea – or the truth as I know it. As Solnit succinctly writes, ” . . . I objected to the behavior of a man only to be told that the incidents hadn’t happened at all like I said, that I was subjective, delusional, overwrought, dishonest – in a nutshell, female.” Add strident, shrill, and harping to that list whenever we have a complaint. Any complaint. (Whereas “to hold forth” is a very masculine action verb.) She calls this an “invitation to silence.”
The best way to maintain the silence of women is by destroying their rights as sovereign beings. Agency is the notion that women own themselves, body and mind, and have the means to be heard and advocate for themselves. We should have enough power in society to be able to change things for ourselves. Right now we do not.
A fabulous documentary with a lot of super kick-ass ladies like Katie Couric, Gloria Steinem, Margaret Cho, Gina Davis, et al. is Miss Representation. Itexposes how mainstream media contribute to the massive under-representation of women in positions of power and influence in America. We are 51% of the population and 17% of our lawmakers. (And the laid back not-quite-half of SCOTUS).
When you understand what having agency means, a lot of touchy issues become a little more clear. Take abortion and reproductive rights. The touchiest. No matter what choice a woman does or does not make about becoming a mother, an unwanted pregnancy is fucking terrifying. If you will be bearing the brunt of the expense and insanity a new human brings with it into the world, knowing what we all do about the state of employment and benefits for single women, you are staring down a problem that will cause heartbreak no matter what happens.
That’s the reality. We are never going to “solve” abortion. All women need to understand that if you limit another woman’s agency in one arena of society you erode it on every level. Even though anti-choice activists fervently believe they are saving a pregnant woman (or child) from their own bad decisions and future regret, they are still stealing her ability to control the course of the life that belongs to her. I am a woman of faith (a Christian faith *gasp*) and firmly believe that free will is ordained by God.
Is it not?
The laws they advocate for strip our rights as a whole. No man will ever have an abortion or a baby. Of all the issues that women should control in the legislative body, this is the only that is exclusive to us. But men and the misguided women who work with them are robbing women I know of health care services in all respects.
Alright. Enough of that.
Here I will mention a recent silencing. The women (and men) who were targets of the #Gamergate harassment campaign are being silenced through raw fear for their lives. The threat of violence is frequently as limiting and life destroying as violence itself. That these sorts of coordinated attacks are never as aggressively investigated and prosecuted as other actions which directly harm a person, is either a massively stupid interpretation of what free speech means or we’ve still got a really long way to go, baby. (#Gamergate is still officially referred to as a “controversy” by the way).
Again, any sensible woman would understand the seriousness of using the vast influence of inconnectivity to destroy a person’s safety, livelihood, and participation in a chosen field. But we are not, for the most part, the gender who decides what laws are needed to keep us safe and healthy.
It seems to make no sense. It does not compute.
“One of the most radical things you can do is to actually believe women when they talk about their experiences.”
I know other progressives are looking to report Nancy’s legacy as one deeply marred by her simplistic 80s anti-drug campaign. And they absolutely should bring attention to the moral admonitions and legislative efforts that began the Drug War in earnest. Nancy and Ron have the blood and shattered lives of millions on their heads for criminalizing all illicit drug use and enacting global zero-tolerance for the drug trade. The harm stretches from the Gray Wastes described by Ta-nehesi Coates to the current Berlin Wall-like situation on our southwestern border. The estimated casualties of the drug war are hard to calculate, but the effects been largely negative. Those progressives are correct.
Yet Nancy Reagan is never given enough credit for how well she ran the country through her husband, who was frequently laid low with cancers, gunshot wounds, and encroaching Alzheimer’s. “Nancy-pants” was by far his best ally and source of strength. Though her anti-drug efforts and general opinion of drug users was dead wrong, she thought it was vital to get young people off of drugs. Her intentions were good. She and Ron believed they were doing the right thing. Even though Nancy probably had a crystal ball in addition to her astrologers, she was unable to see the ramifications down the road.
“After [the Iran-Contra scandal], his approval ratings were abysmal,” the historian said. “There was talk of impeachment. She was perhaps his most forceful adviser in counseling him to meet with [Soviet leader Mikhail] Gorbachev and come to some sort of deal that led to the [Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces] Treaty to cool tensions. It encouraged Reagan to go away from hard-line, hawkish policies and make peace and agree to reduce the nuclear arsenal. She played a big role in ending the Cold War.”
Because of Mrs. Reagan’s political involvement, a woman’s compassionate influence joined with the massive anti-armament movement to end the possibility of a nuclear apocalypse. It was a trade off I can still live with. National drug policy would have gone in the direction it did even if Nancy had a more effective strategy to end the negative consequences of drug abuse. She did effectively avert a possible nightmare future full of Kurt Vonnegut’s “fates worse than death.”
Nancy Reagan’s influence over the Most Celebrated leader of the free world may be why we are still around to work on our drug problem.