Who Put the “us” in Uterus?

A significant component of being confident in our own skin is honoring and respecting our bodies. It’s in recognizing that our bodies are sacred — that they belong to no one but ourselves. That they’re private property, and no one has the right to trespass. That no one has the right to touch them without our permission or to tell us what to do with them. That others’ opinions of our bodies are irrelevant. Every human being has this right — the right to bodily autonomy.

But lately, that right is being threatened — at least when it comes to women. In the past year, conservative Republicans have introduced over 900 anti-abortion bills. These are bills that not only attempt to undermine the current legal right that Roe v. Wade established, but also an attempt to redefine rape, restrict access to free/low-cost health and reproductive care, make miscarriage a punishable offense, not to mention other aggressively anti-women measures.

Even though we currently have more women in positions of power than ever before, we still have significant gender disparity within the demographics of the highest ranks of our government. Although we can count on the socially progressive members (both male and female) to support a woman’s rights to her own reproductive health, both male and female conservatives threaten to rob us of those rights. It’s infuriating how these men can so paternalistically propose and support legislation that limits women’s rights, and equally infuriating how these women can willingly throw other women under the bus.

For a group of people who claim to oppose Big Brother’s involvement in citizens’ lives, conservatives certainly have an affinity for him crawling up into a woman’s uterus. They trespass against women’s bodies as if we’re public property — as if any Tom, Dick, or Sally should be able to decide what’s best for us. They give non-self-sufficient zygotes more rights than the live women carrying them, as if we’re but mere incubators.

Let’s play a little game, shall we? It’s a game about what it’s like to walk in another person’s shoes, about pausing for a moment to consider what it might be like to have one’s own right to bodily autonomy taken away. There are three scenarios below: each would affect either men, women, or both. Let’s call this game “What If …?”

Scenario #1 (men only): A man in his 60s discovers that it’s becoming increasingly difficult for him to get or maintain an erection. He decides to seek out medical intervention. Just prior to that, an unprecedented number of women have been elected into public office, and they’re now the majority. They’ve just passed a new piece of legislation entitled the “No Federal Funding for Erections Act” (AKA the “No Hard-On is No Hardship Act”). Under this legislation, erectile dysfunction (ED) drugs would only be covered under the following circumstances: 1) Prescriptions would require spousal consent in the form of a notarized letter from the man’s wife indicating that she desired to continue the sexual aspect of their relationship. 2) Men would have to prove that their erections would be used only for the purpose of reproduction. 3) Men must prove that their erections would not be used for the purpose of extramarital sex, as adultery would not be covered by insurance. 4) There would be no federal funding for ED drugs for single men. There are already too many unwed fathers in this country.

What if … a man’s rights to his sexual health and well-being were taken from him and decided on by others?

Scenario #2 (women only): A woman and her husband have been trying for years to have a baby; they’ve tried everything, but with no success. Her eggs and his sperm counts appear to be healthy, it’s just that the fertilized eggs fail to implant into her uterus. The couple has a strong desire to have biological children of their own. Fortunately for them, another piece of legislation has just passed. This legislation, “Families Value Babies,” requires that all women over 18 have their reproductive systems tested, and those who prove to be fertile and/or have viable wombs are entered into a database. They are legally required to donate eggs and/or womb-space to childless couples needing assistance or else face criminal consequences.

What if … Big Brother legislated forced surrogacy or forced egg donation, requiring a woman to carry a child for another woman or give up her eggs?

Scenario #3 (both men & women): A 6-year-old little girl’s kidneys are shutting down, and she desperately needs a transplant in order to survive. Due to recent legislation called the “Right to Life Act,” all Americans must now submit their health records into a database that enables those needing lifesaving donations to have a large pool of potential donors. The database shows that you happen to be a match for the little girl whom you’ve never met. Although you feel sorry for her, honestly you’d prefer to keep your kidney. It’s a sad situation, but she’s a stranger and not your responsibility. However due to the new legislation, you no longer have the right to say no. Since you can survive with one kidney, you are required to donate the other to the little girl. If you choose not to, you can be charged with manslaughter if she dies.

What if … we were legally forced to donate our organs, blood, bone marrow, etc. against our will and were threatened with punishment if we declined?

The Point of this Game:

What if … we didn’t have a right to decide if we wanted to make certain sacrifices with our bodies? What if … all of our medical decisions were decided for us by those who claim to know better? What if … we were legally required to submit to invasive medical procedures against our will? What if … a group of legislators’ (or voters’) personal moral beliefs were allowed to trump our rights to our own personal business?

An individual’s bodily autonomy is an essential right that must be respected. Despite the patriotic talking points and flag-waving, conservatives fail to consider this vital point: If our country denies women control over our own bodies, then we are neither free nor independent.