Although this sort of thing isn’t just a war on choices for women, it’s a war on women in general. After all, no fault divorces noticeably reduced women’s suicide rate, their murder rate…
You’re thinking too small here - it’s not that they’re only trying to get rid of no-fault divorce, it’s part of a larger agenda to enact a bunch of changes to get society back to the point where men could fully control women’s lives. E.g. a man could beat his wife or child until they required hospitalization and that was a “private matter” not a criminal one, or have his wife institutionalized purely on his say-so. The situation before no-fault divorce benefited men more than women to begin with, and the return to that will include a bunch of “outs” and loopholes that are intended for men.
Is it worth noting that adultery is a misdemeanor under North Carolina criminal law? Probably not enforced much in “waiting period for divorce” situations, right now, but it only takes a few theocrats to change that.
Vance’s position on divorce is even worse than his support for this policy might have you believe. In 2021 went so far as to suggest that parents in violent relationships should stick it out for the sake of “the children.”
“This is one of the great tricks that I think the sexual revolution pulled on the American populace,” Vance said. “Which is this idea that like, well, OK, these marriages were fundamentally — you know, they were maybe even violent, but certainly they were unhappy. And so getting rid of them, and making it easier for people to shift spouses like they change their underwear, that’s going to make people happier in the long term.”
He added: “And maybe it worked out for the moms and dads, though I’m skeptical. But it really didn’t work out for the kids of those marriages. And I think that’s what all of us should be honest about. We’ve run this experiment in real time and what we have is a lot of very, very real family dysfunction that’s making our kids unhappy.”
Sorry if I was obtuse. My comment was an attempt at a reference to how from about 1960’s to present, people who called out fascists were typically dismissed as radical leftists or simply hysterical hippies. Used to be kind of a running gag in the 1990’s sitcoms with an angry teen daughter character that calls everyone a fascist.
It was a nice neat way to dismiss the bad things that go on as just liberals being hyperbolic.
In turn, I will extrapolate: it’s my opinion that those sitcoms and pop culture references were likely made by people who exist in a position of high societal privilege.
Most folks who live their lives under perpetual oppression and exploitation know better, from consistent personal experience.
Blimey, you’d hope that the person setting up the fake affair would do their due diligence and check that their fake co-respondent wasn’t in a relationship of their own. Imagine the heartache that could be caused by someone hearing that their partner is mentioned in a case.
Indeed. TV and Hollywood was always a part of a patriarchal system that reinforces itself, especially back then. I think for most of our history it would be difficult to do any sort of major business venture without support or at least approval of a patriarchy.
People who write TV scripts aren’t a representative cross section of American demographics. It’s a business where it is difficult to get into without connections, which tends to filter out a lot of people without privilege.
Same shit, different day. If you think that patriarchy doesn’t continue to shape the lives of women, and contribute to our oppression than, I don’t know, maybe pay more attention to what’s happening in the world?
