There’s an obvious gap in all the onslaught of anti-abortion legislation taking off in the red states. It’s all on women. Even though men’s actions are the literally other half of forming a pregnancy, the main responsibility and legal fallout is aimed at her head, not his. Which we know.
So, If we don’t have the immediate votes to “codify” Roe V Wade in Congress, what if we did an end-run from the flanks instead?
Of course the ultimate aim is to win enough seats to make Roe the law, but in the meantime:
What we push now is: whatever legislation is passed in the states, equal legal consequences must come to bear on the man involved. If an “unwanted” child must be born, then the father is equally liable to support that child. If the mother gets an “illegal” abortion, she can name the father as equally culpable, and so forth.
(Yes there are some laws already on the books that overlap this; but the idea is to federally tie legislation DIRECTLY to whatever Roe laws are passed. )
Now, I know what you’re thinking. So hold on.
The Republicans will immediately dismiss this as ridiculous and a non-starter. BUT WE MUST PERSIST. Because the first victory here, is not in getting it passed (great if it did), but TAKING BACK THE NARRATIVE and SHINING THE LIGHT that anti-abortion GOPers want a country where a man (like one of them) can impregnate a woman and walk away with no strings. That it really is at least somewhat about a way to put a woman in her place.
WE WANT THE PUBLIC DEBATE, you see.
-Now wait a minute, they say, a man is not responsible for what the woman he lays with will do! And we respond: “But we thought you wanted a moral country. You mean you don’t want a man to have any judgement about the woman he has a fling with? And you’re hating abortion, but sanctioning promiscuity?”
GET THEM TO KEEP SAYING THE QUIET UGLY PART OUT LOUD.
— They can’t say no way to prove whose child is born: because we have DNA now.
-They will say: but if she aborts then how do you prove who’s the father? She has the right to offer proof of their relationship as she would before the days of DNA. Yes it gets messy, but how sanguine would these Republican men be to push this legislation if they knew what could come back on the men involved?
There are more arguments that will fly back and forth, but again, the idea is to BRING THE MISOGINY TO THE SURFACE and get them to admit again and again: The man has no part in this.
I know there are many women on the side of anti-abortion, and it’s also a chance to confront them about do they want only their own sex to have the burden. And a chance to show suburban women, others on the fence, this dark side of the legislation.
Create a scenario where all major public figures must stand and declare about male responsibility.
Comments are welcome.