Well, that didn’t take long did it.
In today’s addition, we meet Senator Rand Paul. This is not my first moment I’ve had shameful violent urges towards this elected official after reading one of his quotes, but the line of thinking he puts forth is super common among folks on the right and it’s a major ‘fuck you’ to women everywhere, and so lets take a listen so we can learn just how much they give zero fucks.
“Maybe we have to say ‘enough’s enough, you shouldn’t be having kids after a certain amount… I don’t know how you do all that because then it’s tough to tell a woman with four kids that she’s got a fifth kid we’re not going to give her any more money. But we have to figure out how to get that message through because that is part of the answer.”
Now, I think that his kind of policy is disgusting. The government shouldn’t be deciding how big of a family a person can have. It is, however, already policy in some states. I find that shameful. Because, you know what a better plan is? ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE AND SAFE SEX EDUCATION/CONTRACEPTION/ABORTION DUH OBVIOUSLY OMG.
I’m already yelling. There’s more. He goes on:
…married with kids versus unmarried with kids is the difference between living in poverty and not.
The stats don’t entirely back that up. More importantly, it smacks of a deep bias towards a state sanctioned union, with zero regard for the real world. Not all relationships can or should result in marriage, and the link between unmarried mothers and poverty is much more complicated than a lack-of-marriage-certificate. Marriage is not directly correlated with poverty rate, nor with happiness or success. It is not the answer to this problem.
The answer is giving folks the tools they need to have safe, consensual sex.
The kind of policy Senator Paul is describing polices only women, because it is our body that gets pregnant as a result of sex. So the logical conclusion based on his comments reads: you can’t have sex ed or birth control, but you also can’t get pregnant: ergo you shouldn’t be having sex. As if sex is some kind of privilege for folks who can either afford to get educated and procure contraception on their own, or for those who can afford to support children. That’s ridiculous. Women having sex is natural, the same way men having sex is natural. But he is not talking about men, or giving men instructions on how to stop having sex so they don’t participate in a pregnancy. No, the onus is entirely on the woman. But we can’t allow her access to contraception. Wait. We’re going in circles.
My question: WHAT IS YOUR PLAN? What’s the plan guys? No sex ed, no contraception, no abortion, no pre-natal care and no support or job training for single moms… So. People should just keep their legs closed? And by people I mean poor women?
Ew. That idea is misogynistic and prejudiced in all manner of ways. It’s sex-negative, anti safety and the opposite of empowering. It lacks empathy and logic. Do they hear themselves when they talk? They have no plan, they do not care about women’s health or sexual well being, and they are in complete denial about the real life needs of girls and women all over the country.