POSSESSION IS 9/10 OF THE LAW: ARE WOMEN ONLY ALLOWED AUTONOMY WHEN SHE IS SOMEONE’S WIFE OR DAUGHTER?
“Possession is nine-tenths of the law” is an expression meaning that ownership is easier to maintain if one has possession of something, or difficult to enforce if one does not. When we consider the complexity of power dynamics, control, and gender relations we must look toward this adage and the selective respect granted to women based on proximity and relation to patriarchy.
Following the United States (US) Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization in June 2022, people in the US who can become pregnant are facing an unprecedented human rights crisis. In Dobbs, the Supreme Court overturned the constitutionally protected right to access abortion, leaving the question of whether and how to regulate abortion to individual states. Approximately 22 million women and girls of reproductive age in the US now live in states where abortion access is heavily restricted, and often totally inaccessible.
The consequences of the Dobbs decision are wide ranging. Restrictions on access to healthcare places women’s lives and health at risk, leading to increased maternal mortality and morbidity, a climate of fear among healthcare providers, and reduced access to all forms of care. Dobbs also enables penalization and criminalization of healthcare, with providers, patients, and third parties at risk of prosecution or civil suit for their involvement in private healthcare decisions. Relatedly, the decision opens the door to widespread infringement of privacy rights as digital surveillance is expanded to detect violations of new regulations. New bans also infringe on freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief, restricting the ability of physicians to counsel patients and clergy to provide pastoral care to their congregants. Finally, the harms of Dobbs violate principles of equality and non-discrimination; they fall disproportionately on marginalized populations including Black, indigenous, and people of color; people with disabilities; immigrants; and those living in poverty - is that the point?
My RIGHTS AND EXISTENCE SHALL NOT be justified by MY relation to A MAN.
Every individual, regardless of their gender or familial roles, has inherent value and rights. The idea that a woman's worth is determined solely by her roles as a mother, wife, daughter or sister is a stereotype that perpetuates traditional gender roles. It's important to recognize and respect women’s autonomy and individuality. The persistent possessive argument that, “ she could be your wife or your daughter” seems to be the only framing that invokes empathy (from men) when a woman’s choice or autonomy is in question.
Women, like men, have the right to pursue their own goals, ambitions, and interests. Their value should not be solely defined by their relationships or familial roles. Each person's right to everything—whether it be education, career opportunities, or personal fulfillment—should be based on their individual capabilities, choices, and aspirations. Among men, just 22% consider themselves to be a feminist. The idea that a woman's worth is determined solely by her roles as a mother, wife, daughter or sister is pervasive in our current culture. When male allies appeal to their brethren through the lens that, “she could be your ….” or “ she is my…” permits his relationship to supersede her autonomy. When male allies try to appeal to their brethren through the lens that, “she could be your ….” or “ she is my…” allows his relationship to supersede her autonomy.
Harvard University researchers compiled a list of venture capital firms and startups that were backed by venture capitalists going as far back as 1990. The study surveyed genders of their senior partners’ children and from this data set found that there is a “daughter effect”: Having a daughter correlated with a 24% increase in the likelihood of a senior partner hiring a woman investor. The "daughter effect" firms were more profitable having a 3% increase on the returns on investments. It should be noted that 75% of VC firms have never had a single female partner.
A decade of studies taken between 2006 and 2015 found that judges with daughters were found to rule more frequently in favor of women’s rights while members of congress voted more often in favor of women’s rights when they have daughters and CEOs with daughters run more socially responsible firms. These studies demonstrate is that men refuse to acknowledge sexism unless it directly impacts the women in their lives on a personal level like their daughters, wives, sisters, and mothers. Sons who have examples of working mothers are noted to have more feminist attitudes. It’s easy to conclude that men often empathize with women of direct relation.
The idea that people have empathy for women outside of the women and girls who are of direct relation shouldn’t be a novel concept. The need for healthcare or an abortion or the acknowledgement of rape or sexual assault shouldn’t be accessible because a woman has a husband, father, brother or otherwise. Women’s rights, my rights and existence shall not need to be justified by my relation to a man.
The most infuriating application of this sexist, possessive language was during the 2016 election when the now disgraced, twice impeached, credibly accused rapist, insurrectionist leader and 91 felony count former president was caught on a hot mic boasting that he enjoys repeatedly sexually assaulting women. The response to this from numerous male congressmen and leaders was generally that they found Trump’s behavior indefensible because they were husbands and fathers - not because Donald J. Trump and other sexual predators are shitty humans or because women are human beings worthy of respect.