by Terry Moon
It is a fact that Donald Trump and his MAGA movement are trying to take control of women’s bodies. In the fifty years of the Women’s Liberation Movement, the demand has always, always, been that we have the right to control our own bodies. That remains the truth.
What is staggering to realize is that now the retrogression has become so deep and lethal that not only is the fascist right trying to take control of our bodies, they aim to define what we should think, what we should feel, in fact who we are!
TELLING WOMEN WHAT TO FEEL
Women’s March for Reproductive Rights in San Francisco, California, on Oct. 2, 2021. Photo: Heidi De Vries, CC BY 2.0
What’s horrible and reactionary about what Trump’s Vice-Presidential candidate J.D. Vance said is not so much that women who don’t have children love cats, but that they “are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made…” He’s saying that women who choose to not have children should be “miserable.” It’s a not-so-subtle code of saying that if women don’t have children, they will be miserable because they are not fulfilling god’s plan. To Vance and his ilk, women have no right to self-development or self-determination, they can’t even think about it because their destiny, their lives, are determined by their biology. That’s right, we’ve gone all the way back to biology is destiny.
Missouri Senator Josh Hawley, in his very clever 2021 speech where he blames the Left and Democrats for undermining men’s god-given masculinity, says something similar. He does it, not by talking about women but about men. Men too have a certain destiny set down by god that they must fulfill or they will be miserable. First, he defines “traditional masculine virtues” as “things like courage, and independence, and assertiveness.” Ironically, he claims that “the Left” defines these “traditional” masculine virtues “as a danger to society.” In truth, these traits are only viewed as a danger when women express them—and then it’s those on the Right who are appalled—a truth that he, not surprisingly, ignores.
Hawley opines that America is a mess because Democrats and the Left attack men. But he says: “liberty requires virtue. And in particular, it requires the manly virtues. America needs good men.…” He can’t quite get away with ignoring the fact that it is not only men who are courageous, independent and assertive: “That’s not to say that women don’t possess them,” he briefly admits, reclaiming them for men in the very next sentence: “But it is to say that these virtues are the bright side of the aggression and competitiveness and independence that psychologists, no less than philosophers, have long observed in men.” Oh, well, then it must be true.
‘MANLY VIRTUES’ RULE
Hawley doesn’t come out and say directly that women’s place is in the home, having children and taking care of her man, but he certainly doesn’t want them to have good paying jobs. While he thinks that “We must make every effort to restore a vibrant manufacturing sector in this country,” it is only men who are going to work there: “…that can employ working men at living wages—wages that can feed a family, and support a community.” His vision is clear: America should be the place where men are the heads of families, women have the babies, men make the decisions.
Hawley is cleverer than Vance: he doesn’t insult women openly, only ignoring them and at the same time demanding that they must play their traditional roles so that men can practice their manly virtues: “We should be clear,” he pontificates, “in the message we send about family and unapologetic: There is no higher calling, and no greater duty, than raising a family. And we should encourage all men to pursue it.” It’s pretty hard to raise that family if the little woman would rather have a cat, or worse, would rather be a doctor, or finish college, or just be an equal partner in making decisions. She must be put in her place.
A third strident male voice commenting on women’s place and what they should think, feel and be is Harrison Butker’s. This football player’s claim to fame was giving a sexist, anti-Semitic, and anti-LGBTQ+ commencement speech at Benedictine College in Kansas in 2024. Since then, he’s recently started UPRIGHT, a PAC whose goal is to “reclaim the traditional values that have made this country great” by getting conservative Christians to vote—and not for Kamala Harris. As I write these lines, he’s out campaigning with no other than his brother in sexism, Hawley.
TELLING WOMEN WHAT TO THINK
“Patriarchy.” Author: Nurelakasaradia, CC BY-SA 4.0
Butker felt free at Benedictine to let loose his fundamentalist Catholic ideology, spending a lot of time castigating priests for not being fundamentalist enough as he praised and advocated for the traditional Latin Mass. He told students: “it is our duty and ultimately privilege to be authentically and unapologetically Catholic.”
The segment of his talk that got the most notice was the fundamentalist dogma regarding women who he wants to speak to because it is women “who have had the most diabolical lies told to you.” His contempt for the women in the audience is revealed in his next sentence, which assumes that women’s desire for a future not circumscribed by marriage is driven by a desire for fame and fortune: “How many of you are sitting here now about to cross this stage and are thinking about all the promotions and titles you are going to get in your career?” Then he tells them, like Vance, what they should be excited about: “I would venture to guess that the majority of you are most excited about your marriage and the children you will bring into this world.”
As for women having any control over our bodies, Butker rages: “But let’s be honest, there is nothing good about playing God with having children—whether that be your ideal number or the perfect time to conceive. No matter how you spin it, there is nothing natural about Catholic birth control.” Butker is expressing his rage that U.S. Catholics use birth control almost as much as non-Catholics. I’m sure he knows they also have abortions.
Butker also “leans in”—one of his favorite expressions—on Hawley’s idea that men in the U.S. are “attacked” for their “manly virtues”: “Part of what plagues our society is this lie that has been told to you that men are not necessary in the home or in our communities. As men, we set the tone of the culture, and when that is absent, disorder, dysfunction and chaos set in. This absence of men in the home is what plays a large role in the violence we see all around the nation. Other countries do not have nearly the same absentee father rates as we find here in the U.S., and a correlation could be made in their drastically lower violence rates, as well. Be unapologetic in your masculinity, fighting against the cultural emasculation of men.” Of course, no other country has either the number of guns or the permission to use and carry them everywhere as the U.S., but let’s blame women-headed families for the violence instead, and perpetuate the lie that men are being told they are “not necessary.”
TELLING WOMEN WHO WE ARE
So why spend so much time on these three men who spew this kind of Catholic fundamentalist sexist, anti-gay religious arrogant convictions? Because these are some of the same kind of people who are running the most extreme anti-abortion organizations in the U.S., like Susan B. Anthony-Pro-Life America, and American Association of Pro-Life OBGYNs.
That is why they insist that women experiencing life-threatening pregnancies must—must—deliver an “intact fetal body” either by an unnecessary Cesarian section, which is much more dangerous and expensive than an abortion, or by going through an unnecessary and possibly dangerous labor. Be it Catholic, Evangelical, Jewish, any fundamentalist religion is a danger to women and opposed to our freedom.
This is so because fundamentalists will never be satisfied with ending abortion—although that is where the battle is right now in the U.S. They will not stop until they have defined our lives: taken control of our bodies, determined what we should think, what we should feel, in fact who we are! That is why this is a battle we cannot lose.
I read as article from Rebecca Solnit in The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/nov/01/maga-trump-men-supporters-womens-rights?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other), the day after the article above was posted. It is titled: “Some Maga men seem to think women don’t have rights—starting with their wives”–and throws more light on what I wrote about above. Here are some excerpts:
“This week, the fundamentalist Christian pastor Dale Partridge argued in a series of tweets that ‘in a Christian marriage, a wife should vote according to her husband’s direction.’ In other words, he pits his version of the religion against the constitution, which…guarantees adult citizens the right to vote regardless of sex… [I]n effect [he] gets two votes and she gets none. The far-right preacher is not alone in this argument…
“Jesse Watters, the Fox News personality, has argued that if he found out his wife ‘was going into the voting booth and pulling the lever for Harris, that’s the same thing as having an affair.’ It violates ‘the sanctity of our marriage; what else is she keeping from me?’ Rightwing agitator Charlie Kirk also got upset about the idea that women might vote according to their agenda and not their husband’s….
“I just wrote a Guardian piece about the fact that so many women apparently are bullied over their political beliefs, despite assurances that there are ways to vote without being tyrannized, is troubling. It suggests that there’s a whole other kind of voting suppression and coercion that deserves investigation and raises questions about voting at home.
“…These Maga men don’t think that wives and girlfriends should be free to vote as they choose, nor that wives and girlfriends have the right to privacy in their political choices. They, in other words, do not believe she should have a choice. Which boils down to not believing she has rights, and if they don’t believe women have rights here, they don’t believe they have them in a lot of arenas.”
I very much appreciate this article, this clarification of the rhetoric we have been hearing, in increasingly explicit language, from the right. It’s too easy for regular folks to wear blinders and convince ourselves that such words are coming from the margins and don’t represent general thinking. I am a mental health worker, and have spent hundreds of hours working with many men (and a few women) convicted of partner violence and/or sexual offenses.
In our sessions we would spend a lot of time untangling ideas about healthy human qualities, like courage, independence, and strength, from perceptions of masculine importance based on domination, male entitlement, aggression, indifference to feelings (one’s own as well as those of others), control of others, and cruelty. Emphasis was always placed on men’s dignity, feelings, and autonomy being just as important as women’s/girls’ dignity, feelings, and autonomy… AND Women’s dignity, feelings, and autonomy being just as important as men’s/boys’ dignity and autonomy. So the type of arguments being promoted by these patriarchal “influencers” mentioned in the article are familiar to me in that context; I see that rather than diminishing over the decades, they are currently gaining ground. And this terrifies me.
There are many reasons to point the finger at Democratic politicians for their capitalistic and imperialistic policies. I am outraged by… one thing after another. I raise my eyebrows when I hear anyone speak with great reverence about a dem politician. But the direction that the Republicans are taking this country should be obvious to us by now, so I am very worried about the “they are both the same” arguments I hear from other comrades on the left.
Of course, duh, Republicans and Democrats are both upheld by capitalism, they both uphold capitalism. BUT seems to me we need to push back against the explicitly fascist agenda being shoved at us, and THEN work against the imperialism of the dems. Otherwise, future pushback will be like fighting a dual with a stick, while the other guy has his pick of firearms and blades.
Woman who Sings
Hello Terry,
I really enjoyed your article, not the least because it is so well written.
I do have one caveat: the snakes have all the best lines. You spend most of the article quoting Vance, Hawley, and other misogynists and the only voice opposing them is yours. I think more ink spent on other women opponents would strengthen your case. It would allow you to point out that their opponents come from across the political spectrum – and come to think of it, aren’t limited to just one sex.
That’s a thought for the future. Again, a very fine article and one that addresses an important topic.
Ruth
Dear Ruth,
Thanks so much for responding to the article “A battle we must win.” I appreciate the critique and think you make an important point. There certainly are women and men fighting back and clearly many Republican women voted for the right to abortion.
What concerns me is that so much of the fightback is all pointed towards pushing the Democratic Party to do more. Finally, we did get a spokesperson in Harris who spoke passionately about the need for women to control our own bodies. Sadly, I’m jaded enough to believe that she and the Democratic Party did so because they recognized the popularity of that position and thought it would help them. But it was always important, if not overwhelmingly popular, but the Party never made use of its bully pulpit to educate the U.S. public on its importance, what it would mean if it became illegal, unavailable. When Obama rescinded the global gag rule, for example, he did it without any publicity and the briefest of comments and, as you know, Biden could barely say the word “abortion,” and so basically didn’t.
When one looks at what happened in Poland, in Ireland, in Mexico and other countries, we see that women attacked the ability of their countries to continue business as usual. They attacked the government and the Church and were ready to tear them both down. I worry that we don’t have that kind of movement because instead of taking to the streets and vowing to shut the place down if it doesn’t recognize the humanity of half the human race, the movement here puts all its eggs in electing Democrats and then when they lose, we’re devastated but we just start over and vow to work harder.
However, I can’t keep up with everything going on and I could certainly miss some important developments and/or individuals who are doing something different. I think we will learn something at the Women’s March coming up in January at the inauguration. If you can point me in the direction of women and men taking a different route I would greatly appreciate it. Thanks again for writing.
For freedom,
Terry