Browsing the news today, I spotted the headline “Women can say no to sex if Roe falls, says architect of Texas abortion ban” in The Guardian.
My first thought was, all women should refuse sex if Roe fails. Obviously that won’t happen. Then, as soon as I realized I was reading about a man (naturally), I thought “I hope he’s married and his wife refuses to have sex with him.” Well, that probably won’t happen either, since he likely would not have married such a woman. Or maybe they’ve already had their kids and pregnancy is no longer a concern for them.
I kept reading and it became apparent that this idiot believes most women just think of abortion as birth control. Seriously? He thinks women are that casual about abortion? That abortions are that quick and easy and easy to come by? That a lot of soul-searching doesn’t go into every abortion, before and after? That those women are solely responsible for their pregnancies!!???
It takes two to tango, you misogynist pig! Pregnant women don’t get that way by themselves. Where’s the male responsibility? If Roe fails, how ’bout the men stop having sex. That, too, would solve the abortion issue.
But I imagine he’s one of those men who think they are entitled to sex whenever they want it, and that if a pregnancy results, it’s entirely the woman’s problem because obviously he’s not the pregnant one!
For the record, the misogynist’s name is Jonathan F. Mitchell, and the media credit/condemn him for devising the Texas abortion bill, the one that forbids any abortion after 6 weeks and lets any citizen sue anyone who “aids or abets” an abortion. The bill is grotesque and dangerous. As is the man who devised it.