Enthusiastic Consent

sfb-slider-consent-940x360

Guys, we’re in a situation here. The #MeToo movement has not only exposed countless men in positions of powers who have been harassing, assaulting, and raping women, it has also exposed men, who, for many of us seem way too much like ourselves. We read the account of Aziz Ansari’s date, ‘Grace’ and thought about every date that didn’t go right and wondered if we were ever pushier than we should have been. Most women I’ve talked to about it can recount more than one occasion where Grace’s story mirrored their own.

Despite the story only being a few days old, much has been written about this. The New York Times says the only thing Aziz Ansari is guilty of is not being a mind reader. Others say that his actions are symptomatic of a problem with our culture. But all of these are missing the point. The point here is that Aziz Ansari says he believed everything was consensual. His partner makes it clear that it wasn’t. Given that he doesn’t dispute her version of events, it’s worth noting that whatever consent was given was reluctant at best.

When I was a far younger man my go-to move was that once we started making out, I would say, “Stop me if I go too far.” and then respect when and if she told me there was a line she didn’t want to cross. Of course I was young and inexperienced and not bright enough to realize that for a variety of reasons, a woman who doesn’t want to do something might do something anyway just to avoid an awkward, hurtful, or potentially dangerous situation. This isn’t something that immediately makes sense to a guy like me who isn’t used to partners that are larger and stronger than me, who is never going to be called ‘easy’ or ‘slut’, who is never going to be told I’m playing ‘hard to get’, or that I’m frigid. It took time and experience for me to realize my mistake.

The problem we face is that consent can be a very tricky thing. As coercion, even unintentional coercion, can make apparent consent not real consent. You can’t control the factors that might make someone reluctantly agree to sexual activities. But you can refuse to engage in sexual activities with someone who is reluctant to agree.

Part of the problem is the idea that has been ingrained in men practically since birth that the absolute best thing in life is getting some. We learned this around the same time we were learning about Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny and like both of those, it’s complete bullshit. Having successfully had sex with a woman who was at best marginally interested in what you’re doing is not any sort of accomplishment. Listen to the countless women who read Grace’s story and completely related to it. It’s common. All too common. Worse, it’s scarring for women and alienating for men.

This is why I think we, and by ‘we’ I mean men, should not require consent. We should require enthusiastic consent. You shouldn’t be spending your post-coital moments wondering if she really wanted to have sex with you. You should be spending those moments well aware that she wanted you as much or more than you wanted her. There should be no gray areas here. It’s simple. If a woman hasn’t made it absolutely clear that she wants to have sex with you, don’t have sex with her. That’s it.

We need to accept that there will be times where we could have had sex and don’t because it’s not the right thing to do. And guess what? If a woman really wants to have sex with you, she will let you know the next time there’s an opportunity. Enthusiastically even.

Enthusiastic consent* gets rid of any ambiguity because while it’s easy to fake acceptance, it’s difficult to fake enthusiasm. Someone who is willing is not enough. They need to really want it. Not to mention, having sex when everyone involved really wants to have sex with each other is the best kind of sex there is.

– Jack Cameron

*As with any talk about consent, it’s worth mentioning that consent is not like buying a car. It’s not one decision. It’s countless decisions. Enthusiastic consent can be withdrawn at any time. Keep this in mind.

Advertisements

Regarding Us Flawed White Guy Allies

I’ll start by saying what this isn’t. This isn’t #NotAllMen. This isn’t whataboutism. This isn’t me going out of my way to prove how right I am or how wrong anyone else is. What I want to do is point out a danger in the ongoing social justice war.

I am a Caucasian, heterosexual, male. I share this commonality with most mass shooters, most rapists, most child molesters, most murderers, and most of the worst people in the history of humanity. The #MeToo movement is largely due to the terrible behavior of people who share my gender, my race, and my sexual orientation. This is not an opinion, but sad fact and I recognize it as such.

When I see that it is Caucasian men in positions of power who are victimizing women, when I see that it is Caucasian men in police uniforms murdering unarmed black men with impunity, when I see that it is a Caucasian man in the White House threatening the world with nuclear war while lamenting about how much he wants to have sex with his daughter, I am ashamed and want to do whatever I can to help victims of these terrible things. So mostly I listen. I listen to women tell their stories. I listen to people of color when they tell me something is racist. I listen to transgender and non-heterosexual individuals and their experiences. I know that I can never truly feel what they feel, but I’d like to understand and so I listen.

I also speak up. When I encounter bad behavior or encounter someone accepting or encouraging bad behavior I speak up. When I hear someone make a weak argument based on hate or fear I try to come up with an argument based on fact and reason. When someone I agree with comes up with a weak argument I tell them how they could make the argument stronger. When there’s a chance to inform or debate a smart person I usually take that chance.

I also fail. I fail to make my point. I fail to keep emotion out of it. I fail to keep my temper. I fail to have all the relevant facts. I fail to see things from another perspective. Sometimes I fail to allow that I might be wrong about something.

And the problem with that is that the moment I fail, all too often people who I agree with 95% of the time suddenly pounce. Suddenly I’m told I’m encouraging rape culture or I’m racist or I’m sexist or I’ve failed some sort of purity test that has now made me ‘the enemy’. And as luck would have it, I’m a Caucasian, heterosexual male like all the other bad guys.

Now this is not me saying, ‘Please feel sorry for us straight white guys.’ or any sort of ‘poor me’ bit. As behaviors go, if that’s the worst us straight white guys get, then we’re lucky. My concern has little to do with me or how I’m treated. I can take it and I don’t care too much. My concern is that doing this alienates people who would otherwise be allies. But when you call people assholes and tell them they’re part of the problem, they aren’t likely to back you when you want a solution.

I can recognize that the behavior of a few is not the same as the behavior of many. I can separate cause from people who support the cause. But ultimately if every time a straight Caucasian guy like myself says something we are told to shut up and go away, we’ll do just that and you will lose. You cannot win in the fight for equality if you refuse to accept flawed allies. You simply can’t.

I’m not going to make the right choice every time. Neither are you. Accept that and allow your allies to mess up. Allow them to say things you don’t agree with without deciding they must be the enemy. We all make mistakes. Those mistakes rarely define who we are or what we represent or care about. We don’t need to be in perfect harmony to be on the same side of a fight.

– Jack Cameron

My First Book Is Going Out of Print And That’s A Good Thing

selfie

It was 2006. I wrote a book about all the mistakes of my 20s. It was fun to research, write, and release. I had dozens of conversations with people I might never have met otherwise. At one point, I even had a meeting with a producer from Hollywood about making a Ruin Your Life movie.

Ruin Your Life is meant to be a humorous manual of bad but not hurtful behavior. For the most part I think it still succeeds in that.  But there are portions of the book that I find myself unable to defend. Initially I thought this would mean cutting the objectionable parts and reissuing it, but I think cutting parts out of Ruin Your Life runs contrary to the spirit of the book. So I think the responsible thing for me to do at this point is stop publishing it. I have contacted my publisher to have the book be taken out of circulation. It will be out of print and I doubt I will be putting it back in print.

Ruin Your Life had a good run. It sold hundreds of physical copies and thousands of digital copies. I’m happy for the experiences that happened as a result of that book and apologize to anyone who was hurt by anything I said in the book. As always, the reason I portrayed things one way or another was I thought it would be funny. No harm was meant.

For anyone still wanting to get a copy, it is still available on Amazon as I write this. By this time next week it definitely will not be and it could be gone any time between now and then.

Thank you, everyone for your support. Rest assured that my next book, a novel will be out by this time next year at the absolute latest.
– Jack Cameron

Blade Runner 2049 and its Fatal Flaw

The-World-of-Blade-Runner-2049-6-1024x413

I was excited to see Blade Runner 2049. I went to see it with my girlfriend, her mother, and a lifelong female friend of mine. I purchased the tickets for all of us. Many of my friends had said it was one of the best movies they had ever seen. Chris Stuckman on YouTube gave it an A+. Word was that Harrison Ford said it was the best script he had ever read.

So I sat down in the reclining seats of the theater ready to be dazzled. And it was dazzling. There are special effects throughout this movie, but they’re so flawless that I did not spend any time thinking about the CGI. The production design is incredible. Like the original, it looks like a lived in world full of casual amazing technology. Roger Deakins is the director of photography. He’s the best in the business and the way he makes this film look deserves an Oscar. Performances by nearly all of the cast feel grounded in reality and make for an engaging movie. There’s a plot element involving implanted memories that I think is genius. You can find plenty of reviews that will correctly go on and on about how great so many aspects of Blade Runner 2049 are. There is so much to love in Blade Runner 2049.

Sadly, Blade Runner 2049 also has a fatal flaw. The 1982 original Blade Runner had its own flaws. Any movie where your protagonist rapes someone is problematic, but part of the whole point of the original Blade Runner seemed to me to be an experiment in what you can allow the protagonist to do if you just say the people he’s doing it to aren’t ‘real’. It’s one of the things that makes Blade Runner so damn dark. And the culture of the world of 2019 in Blade Runner is fairly misogynistic. (There are literally no female characters in the original Blade Runner who aren’t fake people.) For whatever reason, the creators of Blade Runner 2049 decided that in the 30 years following the first movie that misogynistic side of their culture has been turned up to eleven.

Instead of scenes with women as prostitutes or strippers, BR 2049 chooses to have 200 foot statues of naked women in various sexual poses, it chooses to have giant nude hologram women enticing men. They have a protagonist who has a holographic girlfriend who merges with a prostitute replicant he finds attractive so that he can have sex with both of them at the same time. They have a scene where our antagonist views his latest creation, an adult nude woman who clearly appears afraid. He touches her belly and then he guts her. Some may say these scenes develop character or show off a world that is misogynistic, but sitting next to three women I care about watching these scenes I felt awkward and disturbed.

I am not someone who shies away from graphic scenes in movies. I recognize that some stories require graphic violence, rampant nudity, or even sexism and misogyny, but when these things are presented with no real negative judgment about them, when they are presented simply as a matter of course, when they are presented in such a way that none of the male characters die and most of the female characters die in graphic ways, it becomes something else. There is a responsible way to present unpleasant misogyny in a dysotopian future (see Mad Max Fury Road). Blade Runner 2049 fails to be responsible in this way.

It is really unfortunate that such an incredibly well done movie chose to be among the most chauvinistic movies of the 21st century. For some this won’t be a problem. There are those who are much more comfortable with misogyny than I am personally. Maybe I would have had a different experience if I had not gone with three women I saw cringing and bothered throughout the movie. What I know is that in the year 2017, there is little excuse for a movie that goes so far out of its way to degrade a gender.

– Jack Cameron

A Response To Trump’s Anti-Gun Control Talking Points

Reported-Shooting-At-Mandalay-Bay-In-Las-Vegas_2.jpeg.CROP.promo-xlarge2

So NBC got their hands on Donald Trump’s talking points for his visit to Las Vegas in the wake of the worst mass shooting in America this century. They read like a Greatest Hits of pro-gun bullshit. These are the arguments you see again and again from gun fetishists. And since they are so common and I encounter these so often, I figured I would do myself the favor of countering these all right here so I can just refer the next gun enthusiast who regurgitates this stuff to this page where they can find the appropriate piece of propaganda and see my response to it without me having to type the same thing over and over again.

“Let’s gather the facts before we make sweeping policy arguments for curtailing the Second Amendment. The investigation is still in its earliest stages.”

This is a classic trope. We don’t know enough. It just happened. Have some respect. The investigation is just beginning. Of course none of this actually matters. It could turn out that the guy was from ISIS, obtained his guns illegally, and that no amount of gun laws or regulations would have ever stopped him from his attack. So what. Does a recent mass shooting somehow negate what we already know about gun violence? Of course not. Anyone who wants gun control doesn’t want it because of one incident. They want it because they’re aware that over 120,000 people are killed or wounded by guns every single year in America. I get that 558 of those are in the news right now, but again, even if it turned out that attack could not possibly be stopped by gun control, there are still the other 100,000+ shootings that may very well be cut down by gun control. By pretending that our conversation on gun control hinges on this one incident is to ignore all of the other victims of gun violence.

“The Second Amendment has endured for more than two centuries for a reason: it is a key constitutional right that is meant to protect people’s freedoms, and the President understands that.”

It’s cute how they say ‘the President understands that’. This is the only point at which they say that. Does that imply he does NOT understand the other points? They are correct that the Second Amendment has endured for more than two centuries, but for the most part it wasn’t used to defend the private ownership of guns until very recently. It wasn’t until 2008 in District of Columbia v Heller that the Supreme Court used the second amendment to justify ownership of guns.

I suppose it could be argued that the second amendment is a ‘key constitutional right’, but it’s less clear that it is or was meant to ‘protect people’s freedoms’. People have been arguing about the intention of the second amendment practically since its founding.

“The President believes that our founding principles, like freedom of speech, freedom of religions and the right to bear arms must be protected while maintaining public safety.”

Well that’s great, except that he doesn’t. His administration’s Justice Department is looking into Facebook pages that are anti-Trump with in an effort to identify dissenters. That doesn’t sound like believing in free speech. His Muslim ban makes it clear that if he does believe in freedom of religions, it’s certainly not all religions. And the fact that there are over 100,000 people shot in America every year shows that public safety is NOT being maintained.

“We welcome a reasoned and well-informed debate on public safety and our constitutional freedoms, but we reject the false choice that we can’t have both.”

No, they don’t. If they welcomed a well-informed debate they’d allow and fund research on gun violence. Instead they fight against it. It’s also worth noting that we have quite a few gun laws on the books right now that are not considered even by Trump’s administration to infringe on our constitutional freedoms. Arguing that any new gun control legislation automatically must being infringing on our constitutional freedoms is like saying whatever I’m planning on making in the kitchen must be poison. Until you hear the plans, there’s no way to know if that’s true or not.

“And when it comes to gun control, let’s be clear: new laws won’t stop a mad man committed to harming innocent people. They will curtail freedoms of law abiding citizens.”

Stephen Paddock was a law abiding citizen…until he opened fire on a crowd of 22,000 people and killed or wounded over 500 people. There is this myth trotted out by gun enthusiasts that somehow law abiding citizens and criminals are entirely separate kinds of people and one can never change into the other. It is, of course, like so many of their arguments complete bullshit.

That said, this particular talking point does have some truth to it. A mad man committed to harming innocent people will not likely be stopped by new gun laws. A mad man committed to breaking into your house isn’t likely to be stopped by locks no matter how many you put on your door, but that doesn’t mean you leave your doors unlocked, does it?

New gun laws will not make mass shootings in America a thing of the past, but it could mean less people die. Sure, the new laws won’t stop some determined people, but it will stop others. Just like a locked door stops some burglars but does not stop others.

 “We’ve seen terrorist attacks with knives, by people driving cars into crowds, by hijacking airplanes”

First off, since these are Presidential talking points, does this mean that the Trump administration is finally willing to admit that the Nazi march in Charlottesville was a terrorist attack? About damn time.

Secondly, yes, people have been attacked using knives, cars, and hijacking planes, but that does not somehow negate the 120,000 people who are shot every year. This is like insisting you don’t have a problem with heroin because other people are addicted to cocaine and meth. It makes no logical sense the moment you think about it for a moment.

“Some of the cities with the strictest gun laws have the highest rates of gun violence.”

“This shows that more laws on the books may not work. The problems in these cities and many others isn’t too few gun laws.”

It’s true that the problem in these cities is not too few gun laws. The problem is being surrounded by areas that have too few gun laws. Most of the guns in Chicago come from surrounding areas where the gun laws are lax and thanks to strict gun laws in Chicago, mostly criminals have guns. This is not showing that gun laws do not work. It’s showing that in order for gun control to work in America, it needs to be on a national level. Otherwise you get places like Chicago and Baltimore. Essentially, the Trump administration and many gun enthusiasts simply draw the wrong conclusion about gun violence in cities like Chicago. Whether they do this because they don’t know what they’re talking about or that they assume we don’t know what they’re talking about doesn’t really matter. The fact is that they are wrong.

“Also, we’ve had examples where concealed carry has allowed people to protect themselves and stop a mass shooting in its tracks, such as last month in a church in Texas.”

A recent study shows that for every time a gun is used in self-defense, 34 innocent people die. The fantasy of some John Wayne-type law abiding citizen stopping a gunman intent on committing harm is just that, a fantasy. It hardly ever happens. In fact, if you own a gun and you fire it killing someone, the odds are 2 to 1 that you shot yourself as suicide accounts for 2 out of 3 gun deaths.

“Again, we welcome this debates, but in the wake of Sunday night’s tragedy, we shouldn’t rush toward compromising our freedoms before we have all the facts.”

They do not welcome this debate. Trump has no interest in debating gun control. There has never been a time that he wanted to talk gun control.

As for ‘compromising our freedoms’, it’s worth noting that gun control laws already on the books are not considered by the Supreme Court to be compromising our freedoms. And without talking about specific gun control proposals any allegation that any new gun control law automatically compromises our freedoms can be dismissed as paranoid nonsense.

Finally, let’s put to bed the idea that we are ‘rushing’ to do anything at all about gun control. It has been 18,693  days since 15 people were killed by a gunman at the University of Texas-Austin. It has been 12,132 days since 21 people were killed by a gunman at a McDonalds in San Ysidro, California. It has been 11,369 days since 14 people were killed in Edmond, Oklahoma. It has been 9,486 days since a man drove a car into a restaurant in Killeen, Texas and shot and killed 23 people. It has been 6,743 days since the mass shooting at Columbine where 13 people were killed. It has been 3,825 days since a man at Virginia Tech shot and killed 32 people. It has been 2,887 days since the mass shooting at Fort Hood where 13 people were killed. It has been 1,756 days since the Sandy Hook massacre. It has been 673 days since San Bernardino where 14 people were killed. It has been 480 days since a man went into a gay nightclub in Orlando, Florida and murdered 49 people.

The LAST thing we are doing is ‘rushing’ to solve the gun problem in America.

– Jack Cameron

 

 

If Only We Really Gave A Damn About Gun Violence in America

o-GUN-FLAG-facebook

I spent nearly ten years reading studies, articles, and books while talking to people I agree with, people I disagree with, and people who are just a lot smarter than I am about guns, gun control, and gun violence. I would stop short of calling myself an expert, but I know a thing or two about a thing or two when it comes to guns in America. In the last year or two I’ve cut down on my research because I arrived at certain conclusions that made any further research on my part largely irrelevant.

  1. Most of America agrees that universal background checks and required training on the use and safe storage of any gun that is purchased is common sense gun control. People are less in agreement when it comes to requiring registration and liability insurance but most people like that too.
  2. That said, it’s worth noting that while most of America agrees, also most of America doesn’t care too much about it. We don’t see protesters supporting gun control doing marches, confronting prominent politicians, or doing much of anything really beyond online petitions and lip service towards the concept of gun control.
  3. What we in America have decided collectively is that we’re probably not going to get shot and 30,000 abstract dead Americans every year is a fine price to pay for easy access to guns. We don’t even pay attention to the 80,000 wounded every year from gunfire.
  4. There is a small but vocal population of gun owners who are nearly sexually aroused by the idea of the government coming for their guns or some home intruder breaking into their house despite the odds of such things happening being astronomically low. These are people who will shoot their fellow Americans regardless of what uniform they are wearing before they will relinquish their guns.
  5. Given points 2, 3, and 4, I have nearly zero expectation of any meaningful national gun control laws in the United States.

Now you may want to argue any of these points, and you may go right ahead and do so, but as I said, I did not arrive at these conclusions in any uninformed way. I recognize that America, like the Aztecs is a society in which human sacrifice is part of the culture. We just do it with guns rather than rolling people off of pyramids. And like the Aztec human sacrifices, it is not a practical thing, but a religious thing. Talk to any avid gun enthusiast and you’ll see they have every bit the zeal of the most passionate evangelist. As an atheist, I am well aware that when it comes to religion, no amount of common sense, statistics, studies, or facts will sway a believer from their belief.

Most of us are not gun owners. Most of us do not fetishize guns. Most of us do not hold the beliefs of a religious zealot. But, despite these gun fetishists following a belief system that kills ten times the amount of people who died on 9/11 every year, we do not treat these people the same as we might a member of a ISIS or a Nazi. I don’t see that changing any time soon either. Instead, we are tolerant or indifferent to their deadly religion.

When it comes to guns, people often look to politics, but really modern politics about gun control is all about getting out of the way of the gun lobby. The NRA is a domestic terrorist organization that works as the propaganda arm of gun manufacturers under the guise of representing American gun owners. They spend millions on members of both parties to make sure none of them do anything to mess up the sales of guns and ammunition to any American who might want them. I remain convinced that if enough people cared, protested, made calls, and voted out anyone who takes a dime from the gun lobby we might get somewhere on gun control, but I also remain equally convinced that won’t happen because most people, including you and me, simply do not truly give a shit. Not really.

– Jack Cameron

A Note About Comments: All comments are moderated. Feel free to comment if you have something beyond insults and something involving evidence to back up whatever it is you want want say. Comments with insults, unrelated or bad links, or off topic will be deleted.

The Republican Death Machine: Republicans Are Killing Women

womanIf you are a woman you are more likely to vote Democrat. If you are an unmarried woman you are far more likely to vote Democrat. If you are a minority, you are far more likely to vote Democrat. If you are a first generation immigrant you are far more likely to vote Democrat. If your gender is non-binary or your sexual orientation is not heterosexual you are far more likely to vote Democrat. If you are an atheist you are more likely to vote Democrat. If you make less than $15,000 a year you are far more likely to vote Democrat.

There is something else all of these groups have in common: Republicans have endorsed or enacted legislation to aid directly and indirectly in killing every group of people I have mentioned so far. I know that is a significant claim. Over the course of a series of articles on this site, it is one I intend to prove with facts and sources. It is something I will repeat. Republican policies are murdering the people most likely to disagree with them.

It is no secret that women are not fully human in the eyes of the Republican Party. We dance around this because it is too repugnant to say on a regular basis, but it is the truth. Next year’s ‘Equal Pay Day’ is April 10, 2018. That day is selected because in order for the average American woman to make as much as the average American man did in 2017, she would have to work until April 10, 2018. This is the 21st Century and whenever the subject of equal pay for men and women comes up, Republicans argue against paying women the same as men for the same amount of work. This alone shows that they see women as fundamentally less than human.

Of course Republican hatred of women goes far deeper than simply not paying them the same amount. In 2013 when the Violence Against Women Act was up for renewal 160 Republicans voted against it. This is the typical Republican strategy. They are too cowardly to openly commit murder. Instead they just help those who do in any way they can.

Republicans are famous for being in favor of allowing Americans to own guns regardless of their background. They have fought to keep domestic violence perpetrators armed. They have fought to keep the mentally ill armed. They have fought to make college campuses armed. They even suggest women purchase guns themselves which may seem to be a form of protection but research shows otherwise. Dr. Deborah Azrael, the associate director of the Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center and a research associate at the Harvard School of Public Health said, “What we know is that if a woman is going to be killed by a firearm, she’s most likely to be killed by a current or former intimate partner. What we know is where there are more guns, more women die. That’s just incontrovertibly true.”

Relying on murderous former lovers is not enough for the Republican death machine. This is where the Republican war on Planned Parenthood comes in. The current President of the United States said on the campaign trail last year, “The problem that I have with Planned Parenthood is the abortion situation. It is like an abortion factory, frankly, and you can’t have it. And you just shouldn’t be funding it. That should not be funded by the government, and I feel strongly about that.”

Of course this is untrue on many levels, but it is the standard lie that Republicans tell. It is a well-known fact that abortions account for less than 3% of what Planned Parenthood does and that federal dollars have never been spent on abortions at Planned Parenthood. But, given this is the case, why would Republicans be so adamant about defunding Planned Parenthood? The answer is simple. In addition to keeping women poorer by paying them less, keeping violent attackers of women armed, and limiting a woman’s access to abortion, Republicans want to limit a woman’s access to healthcare in general.

Study after study has shown that the thing that lowers the abortion rate more than anything else is contraception and accurate, non-religious, non-judgmental sexual education. These are two areas that Planned Parenthood excels at. But this is not all that Planned Parenthood does. Every year Planned Parenthood conducts over 600,000 cancer screenings. Approximately 70,000 of those turn out to be women with pre-cancerous lesions or early-stage breast or cervical cancer. Early detection of cancer is one of the primary indicators of whether or not you will survive having cancer. Or put another way, cutting Planned Parenthood funding puts 70,000 women in danger of discovering they have cancer too late to do anything but die.

It is clear to anyone paying attention that Planned Parenthood does a lot more than birth control and abortion services, but it is also worth talking about these services. As I have mentioned before, safe and legal abortion was not the beginning of abortion. It was the beginning of women not dying on a regular basis from botched abortions. There is plenty of evidence to show what happens when abortions are performed by unqualified people. It is also worth noting that having the ability and the knowledge to control one’s reproductive life gives women a better chance to control their destinies. If that is taken away, women become less likely to move out of poverty. They become less healthy. They end up needing to rely on others for support and childcare. Ideally, what a Republican politician hopes is that these underpaid, under supported women forced to have children they do not want will end up thinking they need a man. Because the only thing worse than a woman in the eyes of a Republican is a woman not married to a man.

Marriage is important in the eyes of Republicans if for no other reason than the fact that unmarried women vote overwhelmingly for Democrats. This is a direct threat to the Republicans. Women are not fully human in their eyes and like any other living thing, they see the need to subjugate and control them. It was within my own lifetime that we got rid of laws allowing men to rape their wives. Republicans continue to fight for the right to rape women as long as you are married to them. In Ohio last February Republicans fought against closing a loophole that allowed forms of marital rape. In Iowa this year an anti-abortion bill was proposed that would allow the parents of an unmarried woman to decide whether or not she has a child regardless of her age. Their efforts to control women know no bounds.

The Republican message to women is incredibly clear: If you are a woman, expect to be paid less, expect to be in danger from men, expect to be told what to do, expect a lack of birth control options, expect a lack of healthcare, expect cancer to go undetected, expect to be raped, and if you get pregnant, expect no choice in whether or not you have that child. Expect that Republicans will do everything possible to control you and kill you because not only do you vote Democrat, but you had the audacity to be female in man’s world.

– Jack Cameron

Other sources for this article:
https://www.debt.org/faqs/americans-in-debt/economic-demographics-democrats/

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-conservatives-are-terrified-of-single-women-20160328