MAGA abortion bans are also an attack on men’s freedom

This post is the third in “MAGA and Masculinity in 2024,” an ongoing series examining the social impacts of right-wing hypermasculinity and the people fighting its toxic message by positively redefining what it means to be a man. You can read the first post Here and second entry Here.

Oren Jacobson, co-founder of the reproductive rights group Men 4 Choice, said he had a “slash moment” in 2015 that led him – then a progressive organizer – to focus on reproductive rights and bodily autonomy.

That was the year he became convinced of the real possibility of overturning Roe v. Wade and criminalizing abortion, Jacobson told me on Tuesday. He cited Pew Research Center data showing that most men and women support the legality of abortion in all or most cases. However, he argued, voices critical of abortion seem to dominate the issues discussed.

“I was struck by the fact that the men speaking were trying to criminalize abortion, while six out of 10 of us who thought it was nonsense said nothing and did nothing,” Jacobson said. “And that struck me as a really interesting puzzle.”

The Men 4 Choice Project gained national attention last year and earlier this year when second gentleman Dough Emhoff invited the group to participate in roundtable discussions on how to get male allies to help defend abortion rights. The group’s ads have received support from other prominent activists.

In my Tuesday interview with Jacobson, we discussed hypermasculinity, the role of men in the reproductive rights movement, and the highlights of the Democratic National Convention this year, when Josh Zurawski and Derek Cook took the stage as symbols of the equitable influence men can have in the fight for rights reproductive.

This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Jah’han Jones: What has your work taught you about men’s views on abortion rights?

Oren Jacobson: First, most men do not understand the harm that abortion bans cause. It’s a little easier now, after Dobbs, because Josh Zurawski is speaking The story of Derek and Anya Cook, or the stories of several people in Georgia where women actually died. So this damage is a little more front and center. But especially before Dobbs, and in ways that people don’t even realize, it wasn’t as obvious to many men how many people were being harmed by being denied access to care, whether it be emergency care or just, “Hey, when are you going to start banning and criminalize abortion, OB-GYNs will leave your state, and fewer people will have access to all reproductive health care.” So lesson number one is that men need to understand harm. How does this actually harm my family, my community, and my people?

(Read more about the Żurawski family Here and Chefs Here.)

JJ: What are the other lessons?

OJ: Secondly, most men don’t see it as their problem. In their opinion, it is a woman’s issue. They think, “This doesn’t directly affect me. I have no control over it.”

Third, most men do not see a natural entry point into this organizational work. Most organizations, organizing, messaging, communications and outreach focus on women and pregnant people, which makes endless sense. But pick any population in the country and say, “If you don’t engage with them, what are the chances that they will actually engage with you civically, right?”

And the fourth is that men don’t have a handbook. They just don’t know what to do and they don’t know what to say. So even if you take them through the first three parts, you’re giving them an entry point. You help them see the harm. You help them create ownership. You still have to tell them what to do and how to do it because they know they’re not experts and they’re worried about screwing up.

JJ: What kinds of messages contributed to men better understanding that abortion is also their problem?

OJ: We tell men that it’s not just about abortion. It’s about freedom, power and control. Because no one can be free unless they have the power to control their own bodies and reproductive decisions, right? Not if the government has the power to control you, or the power to control the most important decision you will ever make – whether, when and how to build a family. So we start by embedding the question in a universal framework of values ​​that we all understand. The word freedom is just such a part of our political and cultural discourse.

JJ: Absolutely.

OJ: The second element is what we call stakeholder messaging, which is different from allied messaging and non-beneficiary messaging. Alliance means I will stand up for you because you are hurt. Our message is actually different. It’s about what men have to lose. It presents them as someone whose body may not be under attack, but someone who has rights – whose family and whose freedom.

To make this point, we’ll use a story like Josh’s: If the government has power over your wife’s body, the government has power over your family. So your body may not be under attack, but your rights, your family and your freedom are. Josh and Derek almost lost everything because their partners were denied access to basic, necessary reproductive health care.

JJ: I hear you.

OJ: I should say that LGBTQ+ men benefit more quickly. They see a connection between the legal structure of their rights regarding privacy, government, and the government attacking and controlling people. If you’re queer in America and you live in a state that bans abortion, you probably also live in a state that attacks your rights.

JJ: Sure, in that case you might be better equipped with the language to fend off attacks like attacks on body autonomy and what that means for pregnant people as well.

OJ: Yes, and that is why we focus on concepts such as freedom, power, control. It’s finding a way to center men – putting them at the center of the story (abortion) without making the story about men, if that makes sense.

JJ: Yes. I appreciate these efforts at a time when the MAGA movement uses these words to promote toxic masculinity rooted in brutality and bravado. I see your organization using them for better purposes.

OJ: Many young men in particular are susceptible to this movement as the world around them changes. We are all socialized with ideas. Some of them are good. Some of them are bad. We believe that – not only by Election Day, but beyond – we must build a plan and a movement to win on this issue. To win and fight for young men.