My whole adult life whenever I have spoken out in favor of extending human rights to human beings in the womb, there has been a grating, illogical, and specious response from those who favor denying human rights to unborn humans: "you're a man, this doesn't concern you, stay out of it."
This is the irrational attitude that launched a thousand slogans:
- "My body, my choice"
- "Keep your Philippians off my fallopians"
- "Sisterhood over the patriarchy"
I call it irrational because while the mother of the child is certainly a significant figure in any abortion procedure, there is another human being intimately involved as well. And as a former fetus, I am – like anyone else – utterly justified in speaking on their behalf, particularly since they are routinely denied a voice in these matters.
It's also always been a bit perplexing that the imposition of a constitutional right to abortion came about in the first place only at the whims of seven old, white men on the Supreme Court, yet no one ever seems too exercised about their fallopian interference.
That's why I think the better approach, whenever the issue is one regarding human rights, is to confront the arguments being made and the logic being espoused, regardless of the mind from which they originate.
All that said, I will admit that one of the most unsettling and often creepy things to witness is the aggressive and overzealous advocacy for cheap, quick, easy abortions offered by men. Don't get me wrong, they are entitled to their opinion, and I will reiterate that I think each argument should be judged on its own merits.
But understanding the extraordinarily high frequency of abortions pushed by men wanting to avoid responsibility, the sky-high rate of abortions used by men to facilitate their thriving sex trade business, the staggering number of women who later end up admitting in counseling that they were pressured to abort their baby by an ex or a one-night-stand, I'm always skeptical of a pro-abortion man's motivations.
Granted, some are in it for the votes:
Others, I can't quite figure. Like sportswriter Bill Simmons:
What, precisely, is Bill up to that makes this such a bad day for him? The right to determine the legality of abortion was handed back to the people rather than being dictated by unelected judges in D.C. Does it mean more children will probably survive pregnancy and be born into the world? Yes. That's one of the worst days Bill can come up with? That's weird.
How about NFL quarterback Kyler Murray:
Though I guess Kyler didn't make it clear whether he meant it wasn't right for an abortionist to force his beliefs on the body of an unborn baby girl, I tend to think he mistakenly believes that the Court's decision makes abortion illegal in the United States. Furthermore, his premise is absurd.
Every law that is written forces someone's beliefs on all of our bodies by telling us what we can and can't do. Why does Kyler seem so worked up about the possibility the people in his state might determine one of those things he can't do is kill a baby he sires?
Here's another one of the NFL's finest, tight end Kylen Granson:
Did he mean interracial marriage, maybe, instead of relations? At any rate, what does separation of church and state have to do with this issue anyway? Again, the Supreme Court said that the Constitution does not contain any fundamental "right to abortion" and thus requires that the issue be determined by the states. Are they wrong? Kylen apparently doesn't feel capable of tackling that one, so he goes with attacking religion despite this being a totally amoral, religiously indifferent decision.
And how about Barstool Sports commentator and Instagram star Kevin Clancy:
Setting aside Clancy's religious bigotry for the moment, there's something far more sinister here. If you were unaware, Clancy became internet famous a few years ago not for his witty, profanity-laden online commentaries, but for cheating on his pregnant wife. She says she caught him sending messages to his mistress while she was putting their 2-year-old daughter and 6-month-old son to bed. He'd been seeing her since his wife's 8th month of pregnancy, sharing a hotel room with her days before and days after his second child's birth.
It seems fair to ask why a notorious ladies' man like Clancy would be so bothered by abortion becoming less accessible, no? That maybe it's less about women's rights and more about his own convenience?
Again, all these dudes and the myriad of online keyboard warrior bros that mimic them, may have the most nuanced, thoughtful, wickedly smart, constitutional reasons for preferring a shackled population forced to accept the dictates of an unelected, unaccountable judiciary.
But the statistical probability that many are angry they're losing the ability to easily cover their tracks, shirk their responsibilities, and flippantly treat the bodies of women as mere sexual playthings to be used and discarded, is more than just a little gross.
