“Abortion really makes you hate men.”
I’ve never forgotten that statement. An acquaintance in college who had just had an abortion confided it to me with great anguish. It makes sense that experiencing the indignity and violence of abortion would cause any sensitive woman to feel a very distinct kind of loathing towards men. After all, it was her body that was vulnerable, not his. In the vast majority of such cases the man has zero interest in a child, and – by sudden epiphany with news of the pregnancy – little interest in his pregnant sex partner as well. At that point she knows she was sold a bill of goods: it’s totally a man’s world with no room for her, and no room at all for her baby. Yet feminists prop up that scenario.
I recall my classmate explaining how hard she tried to find a way to make things work out – to keep the baby and still be able to study and travel with the fellowship she had just been awarded. But there’s no room for choices like that in our abortion culture.
The Folly Of Enlisting Men To Promote Abortion
Pro-abortion women cannot and will not help out women who hope for such a happy outcome. Yet they have no problem telling men that they need to support abortion if they want to keep having sex. This was the essence of Elizabeth Plank’s article in mic.com urging men to support Planned Parenthood because: “In a word, sex.”
Likewise, Katha Pollitt recently argued in the New York Times that more men need to speak up for abortion out of their own self-interest: “Where are the men grateful not to be forced into fatherhood?” she asks.
I can’t think of a more anti-woman stance.
It basically tells men to support abortion on demand because otherwise women would be less likely to have recreational sex with them. Worse, the man could end up in a (gasp!) relationship. It also clarifies that unrestricted abortion is largely about putting men in a better position to pressure their pregnant sex partners to “get rid of it.” Meanwhile, we’re all supposed to look at it as entirely the woman’s choice. This is manipulative garbage, and at some level, women know this and resent it.
Feminists have put men into the role of becoming “champions” of women if they support abortion, a procedure that can’t help but cause a lot of women to develop a visceral loathing towards men. Go figure. To paraphrase Planned Parenthood’s slogan, this brand of feminism sounds like “Abuse. No matter what.”
In the end, the only “choice” pro-aborts offer an unintentionally pregnant woman is this one: have an abortion or give up any dreams of career fulfillment. There is no other choice. That’s been their message loud and clear since Roe. President Obama even confirmed this message in his “punished with a baby” comment on the 2008 campaign trail.
Pro-Abort “Feminists” Serve As Cheerleaders For Self-Absorbed F-ckboys
My classmate’s lament also came to mind when reading Amanda Marcotte’s recent Salon article with its unequivocal defense of Planned Parenthood’s organ-harvesting scheme. What struck me most was not Marcotte’s talking points, but her convoluted bottom line. Of those who point out the barbarity of picking through the limbs and organs of young human beings, she said this:
“The real goal is to make it harder for women—especially low-income women — to have happy, healthy sex lives.”
Marcotte’s words – like Plank’s and Pollitt’s — are actually running interference for just the sort of jerk they presume to be confronting.
Consider this recent Vanity Fair piece on today’s hard driven hook up culture in which “f-ckboys,” as the male participants are called, swipe at their Tinder apps and compete with one another for a higher number of scores. Meanwhile, the females comply even though they generally find the whole thing unsatisfying. In this context, abortion doesn’t “liberate” women. It only exists to maximize a woman’s f-ckability. So that she can serve the f-ckboys.
Abortion also works out particularly well as protection for pedophiles who can and do bring minors into places like Planned Parenthood for abortions, compliments of feminist-supported laws against parental notification.
The reality behind Marcotte’s choice of words is to make it harder for women – especially low-income women – to have happy, healthy love lives.
This is obviously what women like my college friend really hope for when they have sex. It’s what most thoughtful people hope for. In a word, intimacy. And this is precisely what they don’t get when abortion is used as a battering ram to promote female participation in a hyper-driven hook-up culture.
If you have followed the March for Life in Washington, you may have noticed that the ranks of post-abortive women supporting the March has been getting larger with each passing year. And they are getting louder and louder too in exposing the lies they were fed.
Wouldn’t it be interesting if the defenders of abortion, particularly elitist women like Hillary Clinton, would direct a teensy bit of their wrath towards the men who use abortion to exploit women rather than towards men who actually take responsibility for the children they sire?
Male Power Elites Use Feminist Enablers To Conduct A Real War On Women
A male activist advocating for universal abortion on demand at a UN conference some 20 years ago best summed up the purpose behind abortion when he said:
“Let’s stop fooling around here. What we’re talking about is our right to f-ck whoever we want, however we want, whenever we want.”
Sexually “progressive” men have always been the main players dictating the sexual revolution. It’s really appalling how their feminist counterparts prop them up and protect them in the name of equality.
Examine some history on this and you’ll see the pattern. Nearly 100 years ago, a pioneer sexologist named Havelock Ellis had a huge influence on Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger. He swayed her to promote his philosophy of unlimited sexual liberation, as well as eugenics. Sanger’s writings follow Ellis’ lead.
A few decades later, Hugh Hefner was happy to ally himself with feminists like Gloria Steinem whose promotion of abortion did more to support the Playboy mentality of exploiting women than it ever did to promote self-determination for women. People like Steinem can continue to spin it however they like. But the fact is that the abortion mindset has spawned more abuse of women by men, not less. Just look around: pornography is epidemic; sex trafficking is rampant; female college students can’t even figure out anymore what constitutes a rape.
But most telling of all is the conclusion of demographer Judith Blake in her study, “Abortion and Public Opinion: The 1960-1970 Decade” in Science magazine in 1971. The results of the polling convinced her that success for a pro-abortion agenda would not come from the grassroots, but from privileged, male elites who were the greatest source of support for unrestricted abortion. She wrote:
“Legalized abortion is supported most strongly by the non-Catholic, male, well-educated ‘establishment.'”
Blake added: “Upper-class men have much to gain and very little to lose by an easing of legal restrictions against abortion.” She urged abortion proponents to look to them for legalization “in spite of conservative opinions among important subgroups such as the lower classes and women.” (No doubt women intuited even at the time that abortion was a bill of goods.)
Nothing has changed here. Just as Plank suggested, men should get on board because “in a word, sex.” Such women sound more like brothel madams than serious feminists.
The real war on women is being conducted by elitist establishment men who have pushed these agendas in legislatures and in the courts, and now hide behind the apron strings of their feminist enablers.
One key to the success of this pact between men who want to exploit women and pro-abortion feminists who gladly accommodate them is their public degradation of women who resist this game, and their protection of women who abet and comply with it. In fact, their “war on women” meme is looking more and more like a specious little scheme to cover up for repulsive behavior towards women by men like Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton. Examples abound, but consider also how elite feminists were basically okay with Keith Olberman referring to Michelle Malkin as a “mashed up bag of meat with lipstick on it.”
Despite Planned Parenthood’s elitist female shills who run cover for jerks, most ordinary women viscerally know that unrestrained sexual activity is an alienating trap. They know deep down that “abortion really makes you hate men.”
What About Happy, Healthy Love Lives?
It’s so sad that feminist elites cannot seem to conceive of the idea of being happy without a non-stop and non-committal sex life that basically equates men’s physical urges with women’s so that the default position is the model of the sexually incontinent male. Worse, this expectation is being imposed on everyone as some kind of social norm – from school age children to the geriatric set.
The problem is that this model absolutely requires that women accept abortion as a stopgap for themselves if they are going to have the supposedly “happy healthy sex lives” envisioned by Marcotte and enjoyed primarily by f-ckboys. Where is the justice – social or otherwise – in that shabby bargain?
Hooking up is an emotional trap. Women agree to having sex because they want intimacy or some sense of being wanted. But the abortion mentality can’t help but interfere with intimacy. Because any way you spin it, abortion is still an act of death. There’s no freedom there. Just a big fat effing lie.
“An Ever Increasing Craving For An Ever Decreasing Pleasure”
So what does a woman end up doing in the midst of using abortion to prop up a “happy healthy sex life?” She generally harden her heart — to her potential or unborn child in particular, and to men in general. Again, this is bound to make true intimacy — a love life — less attainable.
In the meantime, pop culture keeps churning out the message that all must comply with the default model of the sexually incontinent male. People keep buying into it and end up living the Rolling Stones’ song: “I Can’t Get No Satisfaction.” Of course, the “everyone-is-doing-it” meme creates the false illusion that her yearning for intimacy will be met if only she opens her legs as instructed by the media machine.
She ends up paying an exorbitant and total rip-off price emotionally, mentally, spiritually and physically for the interaction that got her pregnant. Many post-abortive women report depression and a sense of being haunted by the ghost of their child. Those who insist “no regrets” have simply found a way to anesthetize themselves emotionally, which in the end is no gain.
The hook-up routine is bound to get tiresome, even with a string of different partners since the abortion/hook-up culture requires those who live within it to all be of the same mind when it comes to sex. When there is no commitment, it’s bound to degenerate into a power game, as exhibited in this one line from that Vanity Fair piece: “It’s a contest to see who cares less, and guys win a lot at caring less.” At the same time the article reports an epidemic of erectile dysfunction among these young men.
So for the thoughtful woman and the thoughtful man this regime adds up to what C.S. Lewis described in The Screwtape Letters as “an ever increasing craving for an ever decreasing pleasure.”
We can apply this rule of Screwtape to just about any other of the sexual paraphilias and distortions du jour. We see the addiction pattern in the mainstreaming of BDSM practices as in the Fifty Shades of Grey hype. Last year in the Daily Beast, same-sex marriage was proclaimed a sexual liberation gateway drug leading to all manner of new sexual possibilities. The proliferation of transgenderism no doubt also has something to do with an ever increasing craving for an ever decreasing pleasure.
The idea, according to Lewis, is to “get a man’s soul and give him nothing in return.” Which is exactly what the abortion culture does to those who drink from it.
Copyright © 2016 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.