More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Bob Burnett

Bob Burnett

Posted: February 11, 2011 09:57 AM

The new Republican House majority had no sooner settled into their offices than they proposed savage restrictions of women's reproductive rights. Americans might question the GOP actions, since the new laws have nothing to do with Republican campaign promises to create jobs and reduce the Federal deficit. But it's consistent with their archconservative ideology, yet another brutal attack in the three-decades-old Republican war on women.

During the Reagan regime, conservatives developed an ideology with three essential elements: unlimited military spending, unwarranted faith in the free market, and exaggerated emphasis on "traditional" values. Whatever we may think of the intellectual merits of their strategy, it reaped political rewards, producing twenty years of Republican Presidents. The GOP tenets recognized changing social mores: the desire of Southern Whites for an alternative to the Democratic Party they had come to see as favoring people-of-color and "undesirables;" the longing of many Americans for a simpler time; and widespread rural anger at coastal "elites" and their so-called "sixties values."

Contemporary Republicans are still promoting the ideology that has worked for them if not for Americans, in general. Republicans maintain that it's essential for the U.S. to have the world's largest military. And, despite the disastrous consequences of the Regan-Bush economic policies, the GOP dogmatically pursues the same flawed notions: low taxes for the wealthy, limited government, and an unregulated market place. And Republicans persist with their traditional values agenda.

There's no reason to believe the GOP traditional values agenda has broad political appeal. Over the past decade attitudes about abortion have remained relatively static: three quarters of Americans believe that abortion should be available in some circumstances and only one quarter feels it should not be permitted at all. But abortion foes are primarily Republicans and, therefore, abortion has become a litmus test for GOP candidates; if a politician is not aggressively "pro life," there is little chance that he or she can achieve national power in the GOP -- that's one of the reasons why New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg isn't touted as a possible 2012 Presidential candidate.

Abortion and rejection of same-sex marriage are the most visible manifestations of the Republican traditional values agenda. They are the banners that herald a conservative world-view that is radically different from that of progressives. In his landmark book, Moral Politics University of California Linguistics Professor George Lakoff examines the elemental differences between Republicans and Democrats. Most Republicans/conservatives favor a "strict father" family system, while most Democrats/progressives support a "nurturant parent" model. Lakoff explains how these alternative worldviews shape the divergent opinions about hot-button issues such as reproductive rights and pay equity.

Men and women are viewed quite differently in the competing worldviews. The conservative "strict father" family model casts the man as the unquestioned leader of the family: father, breadwinner, and protector. Women are subordinate to men, caregivers for the children and father.

This deep-seated paternalism has prompted Republican opposition to legislative measures to promote gender equality including ratification of the CEDAW treaty (Convention on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women). At the November 18, 2010, Senate CEDAW hearing, only Steven Groves from the archconservative Heritage Foundation spoke in opposition. Groves claimed CEDAW has a clandestine pro-abortion agenda, "[seeks] the modification of the roles of men and women as husbands, wives, caregivers, and breadwinners," and "supports the concept of 'comparable worth' to address allegations of gender discrimination in compensation." As a consequence, no Republican Senator supported the ratification of CEDAW and it never came up for a full Senate vote.

The Republican traditional values agenda is the bulwark of their three-decades-long war against women, an absolute repudiation of the notion of gender equality. There are three aspects of this campaign of which the attack on reproductive rights is the most visible. Conservatives believe that women's access to contraception and reproductive services has undermined the family. Recognizing that a strong majority of Americans wants abortion to remain legal and affordable, Republicans have been chipping away at it bit by bit (That's the purpose of the "Smith bill" H.R. 3 and the "Pitts bill" H.R. 358.)

But there are two equally important wings of the traditional values agenda. Republican oppose pay equity. That's why they show so little regard for employment discrimination, the fact that women typically earn 23 percent less than men for comparable work.

Finally, Republicans seek to diminish the number of women in American politics and in the 2010 elections they turned back the tide of slow but steady progress. After the mid-term elections there were fewer women in the House of Representatives and fewer women in state legislatures.

In the final analysis, contemporary Republican ideology has three interlocked components: promoting a permanent state of war; favoring the interests of the rich over those of the poor; and relegating women to be second-class citizens whose rights are subordinate to those of men.

 
The new Republican House majority had no sooner settled into their offices than they proposed savage restrictions of women's reproductive rights. Americans might question the GOP actions, since the n...
The new Republican House majority had no sooner settled into their offices than they proposed savage restrictions of women's reproductive rights. Americans might question the GOP actions, since the n...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 50
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
FTracy3
My micro-bio is as empty as the rest of my life.
03:21 PM on 02/12/2011
Savage, brutal, and war all in the first paragraph. Thank god we're toning down the rhetoric.
11:28 AM on 02/12/2011
Have you ever taken the time to do something and when it is over you realize you just wasted time that you will never get back? Reading this article does that.
IMOPINIONH8D
because I want it empty...
09:35 AM on 02/12/2011
Female teapubs suffer from Stockholm syndrome.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
jmpurser
See My micro-bio
08:54 AM on 02/12/2011
Yes, the GOP is at war with Women, Gays, minorities, and illegal immigrants.  At the same time the Democrats have become sort of a Vichy party, not officially Republican but sympathizing with their goals and working to aid them.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Retrofuturistic
see things as they really are
12:55 PM on 02/11/2011
Outstanding article, Mr. Burnett. Thank you.

I was interested in your comments about the conservative "strict father" family model. I think that all that authoritarianism leads to codependency and cripples people's ability to lead a self-directed life. It especially doesn't work for women, because being in a non-equal position, having to ask permission of the husband as though he were one's father instead of one's equal partner, leads to resentment, which is taken out on the children. And furthermore, a person can only "play a role" for so long. At some point, the urge to be oneself is just too strong to sustain the role playing.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ninetailedfox
banning people.....so childish
12:46 PM on 02/11/2011
I hope that most of these GOPers have daughters, and someday their daughters get knocked up. then we shall see how they feel when it comes to this issue.
02:22 PM on 02/11/2011
They still won't care. theyw ill just send them to another country for an abortion or pay their private doctor to take of it quietly.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joadar
06:41 PM on 02/11/2011
There just has to be a disconnect in their minds between their lives and everyone else's. When it happens to them, they will be telling us it's a private matter and their situation is somehow different.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
daveat1910
11:10 AM on 02/11/2011
Republicans, authoritarian and libertarian, did the old trick again- caimpaigned on jobs and cuts and began cultural idealogy. The public fell for it again. Thank you for making it news.
12:45 PM on 02/11/2011
I didn't know taxpayer funded abortion was part of keeping the government out of your bedroom. One would think that ending or limiting tax payer funded abortion, the GOP is doing the later, would do that. After all if someone else is responsible for what takes place in your bedroom then they certainly have a motivation to regulate what goes on there. Ultimately you can't have it both ways.
02:30 PM on 02/11/2011
But the new bills go much further. The Hyde amendment already say no tax-payer money can go toward an abortion. The new bills will allow any hospital or provider to deny abortion services (even completely paid for out of pocket by the woman or couple) even if the mothers life is in danger. It would also deny current tax credits to any business that wishes to have abortion coverage in their offered plans, even if the women paid for the premium rider completely on her own (no employer contribution).
Plus the "forceable rape" clause is still in there. They said they would use the original Hyde Amendment wording, but the current bill as available to read still has not been altered. Meaning any woman who was drugged would not be considered to have been raped because she was not bodily forced to submit.
photo
cheo
better a bleeding heart than none at all
04:32 AM on 02/12/2011
This is NOT about funding. Since they can't get Roe v Wade overturned, they have been undermining from the moment it became a Constitutional Amendment.
The three bills in Congress are particularly insidious. This IS an effort to disenfranchise women. We still don't have equal pay for equal work, and still do the majority of housework and childcare even when we are working.
One of the bills would disallow medical deduction for an abortion from your income even if you pay for it YOURSELF. None of this takes money out of YOUR precious pocket.
No federal funding ever means that people who can least afford it would HAVE to carry a child to term even if they couldn't support it, which may cause a women to lose her job. NO CHOICE..
And besides the disgusting attempt to redefine rape, there is the provision in Congressman Pitt's bill that would trump current law, allowing a doctor to not only deny an abortion to a dying pregnant woman BUT to also refuse to transfer that woman to a place where she might be able to receive an abortion. In fact, the hospital would not be required to do ANYTHING at all.
This is is heartless, hateful. Its about taking away our rights to control our own bodies and about relegating us to 2nd class citizens
MY BODY=MY CHOICE
RAPE=RAPE
http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/joe-pitts-protect-life-act-abortion
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
thetokensquare
Do you want Liberty? Well, DO YOU?
01:08 AM on 02/12/2011
What do Libertarians have to do with this? I think you're misapplying labels.
11:01 AM on 02/11/2011
It would be difficult to produce a more dishonest article. So wanting to limit taxpayer funded abortion is a "war on women"? I think the author is over selling it. Most people won't believe that. I also love the implication in the article of Republicans being racists. The accusation is especially ironic given the race of the children that are being aborted. Black women abort 60% of their pregnancies in NYC according to a recent study. Who supports that and how has that helped the black community there? Are they thriving? They must be since we are told what a benefit abortion is for society.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Artanis71
Colbert Super PAC unleashed in 2012
01:24 PM on 02/11/2011
Have you read the bill, probably not. The 2 main points are redefining rape, ie forcable rape, and not requiring hospitals to treat or even stabilize a woman if she needs an abortion to survive.
photo
effect
The Shadow knows...
02:30 PM on 02/11/2011
Don't forget making it illegal for a woman to buy insurance that will cover abortions if she qualifies in any way for federal help with health insurance.
02:33 PM on 02/11/2011
When is an abortion needed to survive?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joadar
06:46 PM on 02/11/2011
Tax-funded abortion is not a huge budget cut issue. This is part of a culture war, and nothing else. Forcing women to have children they are not prepared to take care of tends to keep them out of the workplace. It makes them dependent on the men on their lives, which makes them more likely to stay in an abusive relationship. The right to choose is a fundamental aspect of equality for women. You also may have noticed that they are against legislation regarding equal pay for women. What's your argument for that?

Also, are you suggesting that forcing black women to have children against their will is good for the black community?
whochi
This space for rent.
10:49 AM on 02/11/2011
Equal pay for women has been debunked so many times, but you have to give the liberals their due - they will never let the facts get in the way of their agenda.
Women don't get paid as much because, among other things
1. They have yet to equalize their involvement in the technology sector, where many of the higher paying jobs exist.
2. They have yet to equalize their numbers in the higher paying medical jobs, i.e. surgeons.
3. They do not participate in the more dangerous (and thus higher paying jobs).
4. Many postpone marriage and children until their 30's and hence, leave the marketplace or reduce their hours. The 30's is where you lay the foundation to become a partner in a law firm or establish yourself in the business world. Tough cookies that those jobs are going to those who choose to work the 80 hour weeks without vacation or time off for five years or more.

The bill re abortions does what we thought liberals wanted - Get government out of our bedrooms and not hold taxpayers responsible to pay for abortions for consenting adults or their irresponsible children who find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy. Exceptions for forcible rape, incest with a minor or threat to a woman's life are more than adequate and fair. Existing law requiring institutions not providing abortion services to send women to clinics that do, remain intact - you just cannot discriminate against them for choosing not to provide
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Artanis71
Colbert Super PAC unleashed in 2012
01:30 PM on 02/11/2011
You write it and dont even understand what is forcable rape? Rape by its name is forcable but, apparently not to you, if she is alseep, drunk, date rape drugged, apparently that partial list is not "forcible", as far as the rest, to tired to bother but, the I see so many quoting that saying "see its ok they are trying to save money" when you obviously dont understand what why people dont like the term "forcibile rape".
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
joadar
06:48 PM on 02/11/2011
Actually, I have seen studies that show that women are paid less for the exact same jobs with the exact same experience. I don't recall the particular article, but I doubt facts would change your mind anyways. And your point about child birth getting in the way of a profession only proves the author's point. As a law student, if I was raped right now and was not able to get an abortion, that could ruin my future legal career. That is why the right to choose is so important.