FACEPALM: Feminists Propose “Sex Strike” to Save Roe v. Wade (No, Really)

Women march through downtown Boston during the "SlutWalk" in Boston, Mass., Saturday, May 7, 2011, which organizers described as a demonstration against those who blame the victims of sex crimes. The walk was held in response to a Toronto police officer who said women shouldn't dress like "sluts" if they wanted to avoid being raped. (AP Photo/Josh Reynolds)
Advertisement

As we celebrate, feminists are in fits this week as they consider the very real possibility that their precious Roe v. Wade might be overturned once Trump nominates an originalist judge to the Supreme Court.

Trump has always promised to appoint judges that would overturn Roe v. Wade, so they have good reason to be scared!

They’re so scared, in fact, they’ve vowed to stop having sex in order to save abortion.

Which doesn’t really make a lot of sense, doesn’t it? If feminists stopped having sex, it would solve a whole lot of problems, including the perceived need for abortion, right?

Wrong.

Like most left-wing protests, this will basically accomplish nothing. Because, you see, they’re vowing not to have sex with anyone who doesn’t support a woman’s “right to choose.” 

So we’re basically at square one. How many of them were sleeping with men who didn’t support “abortion rights”, anyway?

The Daily Wire has the facepalm-worthy story:

Spooked by the Supreme Court vacancy of Justice Anthony Kennedy, Harper’s Bazaar political editor-at-large Jennifer Wright called for a sex strike from fellow pro-abortion gals to save landmark abortion case Roe v. Wade. Wright instructed her pro-abortion allies to withhold sex and dating “with anyone who doesn’t support a woman’s right to choose.”

The women were told to signal their solidary by posting a female judge emoji in their “dating profiles” and using the hashtag #Lysistrata, in reference to the Greek play wherein women withhold sex in a crusade to end the Peloponnesian War.

Ironically, President Donald Trump is reportedly considering Judge Amy Barrett for the SCOTUS vacancy, a female who called Roe v. Wade an “erroneous decision” in a 2003 scholarly article. Yes, a female judge.

“We’re very likely to lose Roe Vs. Wade. Some men may think that doesn’t concern them. Make it,” posted Wright, adding, “If you’re single and dating, add a [female judge] emoji to your dating profiles to show people you won’t date/sleep with anyone who doesn’t support a woman’s right to choose.”

This is honestly so cringe-worthy. For one, they’re basically admitting they’re already so promiscuous that they think they can make a difference by ceasing to sleep around? This says so much about the way these women view themselves and how much feminism objectifies women.

Second, it speaks to the deep-seated mentality that casual sex is a normal part of life, which it absolutely does not need to be.

Sex is a sacred act between a man and wife, that serves the social purpose of incentivising monogamy, the spiritual purpose of marital intimacy, and the biological purpose of reproduction.

But to feminists, it’s as casual as spending money…so why not boycott sleeping with traditionalists the same way they’d boycott Chick-fil-A, right?

Finally though, is the very sick reality that these women are so very obsessed with keeping the slaughter of unborn children legal, they can’t even think clearly enough to realize their silly little sex strike won’t even achieve anything, since they were most likely sleeping with pro-abort men, anyway.

How sad is that?

Sponsor