Yes, Abortion Is a Women’s Issue, and Yes, More Male Allies Are Welcome
Further, sexist assumptions about women’s role in reproduction are at the core of other oppressions women face. Rape culture is intertwined with ideas that men are irresistibly driven to sex, that women are submissive sexual objects to be conquered, that women are either sluts or prudes. Lack of family supports in the workplace, from paid sick days to paid family leave, are tied with exclusionary and outdated middle-class white assumptions that there will be a woman in the home to take care of the family, and discrimination in pay, promotion, and leadership is underpinned by assumptions that men are primary breadwinners. Pretending that social discrimination against women is not linked with sexual discrimination against women, which can therefore be ignored, may feel “less controversial” but it’s not going to get us anywhere.
When men are quoted in the media five times more often than women on the topics of abortion and birth control, we are simply not ready to move abortion into a post-gender framework that declares abortion is “not a women’s issue.” In particular, it seems that society has a great deal of resistance to putting younger women and women of color, not mutually exclusive categories, at the center of reproductive rights conversations.
While we need more men, more LGBTQ people, and more of everyone taking leadership in the reproductive rights movement, those most directly affected by abortion restrictions—younger women and women of color—need more focus, not less. Turn on the television, and it’s not uncommon to see a white man opposing abortion rights and, if a pro-choice woman is included at all, she is often white and past reproductive age.
Within the abortion rights movement, there is some resistance to having the most directly affected lead the message in a way that doesn’t seem to be paralleled in other human rights movements, including LGBTQ movements and civil rights movements. Some take offense when it is suggested that more younger women and women of color should help lead. This is something that I hope men will keep in mind when taking on leadership roles in the movement. It is possible to be a loud ally and also be an ally who works to ensure more young women and women of color are included, and your sisters need the help.
Do we need more men to fight for reproductive and sexual rights on their own terms? Do we welcome more men to fight for abortion as human rights issues, public health issues, and women’s issues? Is it cool if those men want to call themselves “bro-choice”? The answer is an enthusiastic yes.
Trying her best to sound like a Hallmark card, Rep. Virginia Foxx argued on a local North Carolina news station in favor of a bill that would end overtime pay for hourly workers as we know it: “It’s important to have enough money from your paycheck,” she told WFMY News, “but money can’t buy time. Many parents would like to have the time with their children.”
While the bill, the “Working Families Flexibility Act,” sounds like it gives you more time, here’s what it actually delivers: an interest-free loan to your employer, and a few vacation days that your employer has complete control over.
If you’re an hourly worker, scheduling is a huge issue. And while the idea of time off in lieu of time-and-a-half overtime pay sounds tempting, this bill does not resolve any problems you may have with your schedule. The bill clearly states that employers can deny requests for time off if it is not made “within a reasonable period” or if your time off “unduly disrupts the operations of the employer.”
Rep. Virginia Foxx is right about one thing: Many parents would like to have more time to spend with their children. But under the Orwellian-named “Working Families Flexibility Act,” your boss still decides when you can take that time and when you can’t. Meanwhile, he or she can work you 50 or 60 hours a week and pocket the overtime you would have otherwise received.
Yes, the option of overtime instead of comp time still remains. But there is nothing stopping your boss from treating you differently (giving you a bad schedule, straight-up firing you) if you take that option. “The worker shouldn’t have to have that sort of pressure on them,” said Catherine Medlock-Walton, our Member Coordinator in North Carolina.
So don’t be fooled by this talk of “family” and “children” from politicians like Rep. Foxx.
If they truly cared about our families, they wouldn’t block bills allowing workers to earn sick paid days, and take time off to care for a sick child.
If they truly cared about our families, they wouldn’t oppose increases in the minimum wage, so parents wouldn’t have to work two or three low-wage jobs in order to care for their children.
And if they truly cared about our families, they would not have voted 33 times to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which vastly improves the ability of parents and children alike to afford health insurance and not be denied for preexisting conditions.
There truly are pieces of legislation which would help working families have flexibility. Unfortunately, and confusingly, the so-called “Working Families Flexibility Act” is not one of them.
Pressure is mounting on Capitol Hill for a meaningful answer to the crisis of sexual assault in the U.S. military. In response, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) hosted a press conference Thursday to promote legislation that would remove from the chain of command in the nation’s armed forces the reporting and adjudication of sexual crimes, along with other felonies that are not specifically military in nature.
Gillibrand also introduced her audience to three military veterans who said they suffered punishment from the military when they reported having been the victims of sex crimes perpetrated against them by their comrades.
Jennifer Norris, a former sergeant in the Air Force Reserve, was accompanied to the press conference by a service dog who, she says, assists her with the post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) she experiences because of assaults by four different perpetrators during her military career. (You can read her harrowing story here.) Norris’ military career ended, she writes, when her security clearance was revoked for having a PTSD diagnosis. Today she works as a victim advocate at the Military Rape Crisis Center, a non-profit organization that offers support to those who suffer sexual abuse while serving in the military.
As she sat in the front row at the press conference, Norris’ eyes began to overflow with tears, causing Sen. Barbara Boxer, who was then at the podium, to remark, “I hope those are tears of hope.”
Norris affirmed that they were, saying that she was moved because she never thought she’d see the day when such as change as that proposed by Gillibrand could take place.
Sometimes, what bothers me the most about the abortion debate is the people who talk like they know everything about abortion without having ever walked into a Planned Parenthood or listened to women talk about their experiences or researched unbiased information about the various abortion procedures. I wish everyone could spend a day as a clinic escort or a volunteer on a hotline or just talking to women and abortion providers instead of assuming they know all there is to know.
That was the most informative thing I have ever been told by a duck
And I have been told a lot of things by ducks.
(via truth-has-a-liberal-bias)
In New Interview, Gabriel Gomez Again Does Not Clarify Views on Reproductive Rights
On the failed Blunt Amendment of 2012 that would have allowed secular employers to exclude contraception and other services covered by third-party health insurance plans to employees and dependents, Gomez told the Globe, “Honestly, I haven’t read the Blunt Amendment, so it’s hard for me to go yea or nay without reading the full Blunt Amendment. That’s part of the reason why these guys and women down there should read these whole things. … I’m happy to look at it.”
When further questioned, he said, “Oh, is this like the Catholic Church and all? Yeah, I don’t believe the Catholic Church—or any faith, any organization like that—should have to do something that goes against their doctrine.”
The Blunt Amendment went far beyond allowing religious or religiously affiliated institutions to refuse contraceptive coverage, for which the Obama administration has repeatedly crafted exclusions and compromises regarding third-party health insurance plans used by their employees and dependents. The Blunt Amendment would have made into law the opinion of, among others, the general counsel of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, Anthony Picarello, who last year suggested that even if he were running a Taco Bell he should be legally empowered to stop employees from accessing contraception without a co-pay.
When violent masculinity goes unchecked, it’s really a failure of leadership. This must watch TED talk will explain why. #BroChoice
Benefits of contraception use in the US context
Did you know that pregnant women have been fired for using the bathroom to vomit, needing to carry a water bottle on the job, or asking to sit on a stool instead of standing in place all day? While employers have to make allowances like these for other types of temporary disabilities, a number of bad court decisions have encouraged them to feel they can get away with firing or mistreating pregnant workers with impunity.
It’s disgraceful and unacceptable that at a time when unnecessary budget cuts are decimating food, medical, and educational supports for low-income families, pregnant women continue to be pushed out of their jobs just as they take on all the expenses of having a new baby.
Read more about the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act
and take action by contacting your congressperson.
