Alyssa Milano proposed a sex strike to protest abortion laws—and here's why so many feminists find it problematic
In March, Georgia joined the ever-growing number of states attempting to pass “heartbeat” abortion laws, which would effectively ban abortions after about six weeks of pregnancy (and before many women even know they’re pregnant). The bill made its way through the state Congress, and on May 7th, Governor Brian Kemp signed it into law. In response to this restrictive legislation, pro-choice advocates have shared their own abortion stories and called for action against the new law. One of the most visible ideas put forth came from actress and activist Alyssa Milano, who suggested that women go on a “sex strike” until the law is changed. However, many feminists and pro-choice advocates think the gesture is misguided.
On Friday night, May 10th, Milano took to Twitter to urge women to abstain from sex until reproductive rights are no longer threatened.
While some were on board with Milano’s proposal, others took issue with it. Some pointed out that a sex strike assumes that all women are cisgender and have sex exclusively with men—specifically, men who are anti-abortion.
Others argued that the premise of Milano’s plan ignores that women enjoy sex, too, and that the sex strike would only cause women to suffer alongside the men they are trying to punish.
There were those who pointed out that abortion opponents want to keep women from having sex in the first place.
And others noted that a sex strike ignores the reality of rape survivors and sex workers.
What are your thoughts on this one?