"The War on Women: A Modest Proposal"

[bloom]

by MzNicky

MJS at Corrente writes that, in view of recent proposals that would hand over ownership of women’s lady parts to the state, a terminology change is in order. The Jivester suggests that rather than using the negative “anti-choice” label for those who not only want to force unwanted pregnancy on all females, including rape and incest victims, but also to thwart access to emergency contraception and, yes, even the good ol’ birth control pill, we instead accentuate the positive and call this new confiscatory policy what it is: a War on Women (WOW).

May this latest US declaration of hostility be as successful as the War on Poverty, the War on Drugs, and the War on Terror have been.

In that regard, I’d like to propose that we, the majority of humans who are now equated with poverty, drugs, and terror, just go ahead and get all Lysistrata on these warriors’ asses. You remember Aristophanes’ play, the third in his “War and Peace” trilogy? The one where the women of ancient Greece decide they’ve just about had it with 20 years of warmongering and issue a moratorium on the only other thing that always seems to get the manly man’s attention?

“They meet in solemn conclave, and Lysistrata expounds her scheme, the rigorous application to husbands and lovers of a self-denying ordinance: ‘We must refrain from the male altogether.’ Every wife and mistress is to refuse all sexual favours whatsoever, till the men have come to terms of peace. In cases where the women must yield 'par force majeure,' then it is to be with an ill grace and in such a way as to afford the minimum of gratification to their partner; they are to be passive and take no more part in the amorous game than they are absolutely obliged to. By these means Lysistrata assures them they will very soon gain their end. ‘If we sit indoors prettily dressed out in our best transparent silks and prettiest gewgaws, and all nicely depilated, they will be able to deny us nothing.’ ...After no little demure, this plan of campaign is adopted, and the assembled women take a solemn oath to observe the compact faithfully. Meantime, as a precautionary measure, they seize the Acropolis, where the State treasure is kept; the old men of the city assault the doors, but are repulsed by ‘the terrible regiment’ of women. Before long the device of the bold Lysistrata proves entirely effective, Peace is concluded, and the play ends with the hilarious festivities of the Athenian and Spartan plenipotentiaries in celebration of the event.”

Yes, I know, this has been suggested before; but, as with true Christianity, has it ever really been implemented?

We’re at war here, ladies. One might call it a new kind of war. There won’t be much need for reproductive choice if there’s no reproducing, or anything else, goin’ on. Think of it as boycotting a corporation—which, really, it is not unlike— and hit ‘em where it hurts.

http://guerillawomentn.blogspot.com/2006/03/war-on-women-modest-proposal.html

[Warpy]

1. Denying our own sex drive and need for that sort of physical

closeness and comfort isn't going to work, either, especially for those women with decent and prochoice partners. It will work exactly as well as absinence does, in theory and for women experiencing dry spells due to age and/or unattractiveness.

I wish this would work. It's the one thing that would get their attention. It's where most of them LIVE.

We're just going to have to go back to massive civil disobedience. Perhaps we'll take matters into our own hands this time, with underground collectives like the Jane Collective, providing safe services for each other and preventing the back alley butchers from killing our sisters.

[VelmaD]

2. I think the larger point...

is that we need to work at getting the "War on Women" phrasing into the public consciousness. Learn it. Love it. Use it.

[bloom]

3. For the GD thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=564497&mesg_id=564497

One thing that really bugged me - was in a (different) GD thread that someone had started on a related note (vasectomies for men) and some guy had the nerve to suggest that instead of men being expected to do anything or suffer any consequences - it was up to "young women to fight for their rights".

That just says it all. Unless there is a way for men to see that it IS their issue as well - we will continue the reverse slide.


War on Women is right. Maybe the sale of "toys" will increase.

[VelmaD]

4. It's so typical...

I find it happens every time I try to talk to my allegedly "liberal" male friends about this kind of thing. If you bring up men's complicity in the patriarchal system they ALWAYS want to talk about women who vote republican.

[geniph]

6. If it's up to young women to fight alone

for their rights, then why are men allowed to vote or make any rulings on the subject at all, since clearly they don't believe it affects them?

(Who is always the first to whine about how they can be "forced" to pay child support for a child of their parentage, even if they didn't "know" they'd impregnated someone?)

[NMMNG]

8. I saw, and replied to, that obnoxious comment

What makes men think we aren't fighting for our rights? (we have been all along!) But it's the same old problem--women have to fight for their rights, while men and even some women work to take them away. Right now the Neocon/fundies have the reins and are abusing their power for all it is worth. Two states have already banned abortion outright while others have passed severely restrictive laws. We are on a downhill run to a dangerous territory, and men (probably the ones who think it's up to women to supply birth control) are saying "it's your battle chickies".

Then when an unplanned pregnancy occurs they'll be the first to whine if the woman expects them to pay child support. :eyes:

[ismnotwasm]

5. I saw that in GD

And I just saw that thread by Undergroundpanther. I posted bringing back the Eunuch, which is just as backwards as outlawing abortion. I know it pisses the men off, especially the ones supporting choice, but how to make them understand that passing laws controlling my uterus is no different than passing laws controlling thier testicles? I am not a baby incubator.

[geniph]

7. When men can carry the fertilized ovum to term

in their own bodies, then they can have a voice in the matter. So long as a woman's body is held hostage to an unwanted pregnancy, the determination of the fate of that pregnancy is her business, and no one else's.

[femrap]

9. Bush's War on Women is the only successful war he is

running right now....and it has been a very quiet war indeed....just chipping away at any and all state and federal funds that went to anything to do with women and their children.

Check with your states, women....find out if Women's programs have been funded. All of Ohio's programs for women HAVE BEEN DE-FUNDED!

And check out the Bureau of Labor Statistics within the Department of Labor....WOMEN'S WORK IN THE LABOR FORCE WILL NO LONGER BE COUNTED!!!

The neocons are going to make us invisible.

Let's fight the turds...check out Women's Voices, Women Vote... www.wvwv.org

And the National Women's Law Center has done a fabulous job of documenting all of the crap that W and his neocons have done to women that has received no media coverage. Google that group.