Suddenly, Trump seems enlightened on the topic of women. It’s as if he’s stuck in 1959, displaying a facade of a sun-tanned, hair-swept socialite from a Las Vegas club, frequently referencing women in less than respectful terms. Despite this, he managed to populate the Supreme Court with individuals known for their religious fanaticism and willingness to infringe upon women’s rights.
True, he’s faced legal action for allegations of sexual misconduct – claims of groping women and inappropriate conversations about his entitlement to touch women without their consent. He’s also known for philandering, having cheated on his first wife with the woman who later became his second wife, and reportedly indulging in extra-marital affairs during his third marriage. Notably, he disgraced Melania with his infidelity involving an adult film actress while she was caring for their infant son at home. The ordeal was further magnified when the Stormy Daniels case went to court, adding to Melania’s humiliation (refer to: why Melania did not deliver a speech at the convention).
While his convention glorification seemed like an old-fashioned tribute to machismo – complete with scenes of Hulk Hogan ripping his shirt off and UFC’s Dana White introducing Trump as a brawler – Trump still managed to select a vice-presidential nominee whose views on women were even more backward and harsh compared to his.
JD Vance, a man of many aliases and a puzzling start, recently appeared on Megyn Kelly’s podcast for an interview. During the conversation, Kelly asked him about his provoking 2021 statement to Tucker Carlson where he referred to formidable Democrats – Kamala Harris, Pete Buttigieg, and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez – as “unhappy, childless cat owners because of their life choices and their desire to spread misery across the country.”
Vance’s response to Kelly was nonchalant as he downplayed his comment, asserting it was laced with sarcasm and adding he bears no ill feelings towards cats. The exchange drew laughs, cementing him as the most humorous Republican Party member since the comically unforgettable Sarah Palin.
In a relentless affirmation of his prior contention, JD Vance posits that the United States can only truly be influenced by women who conform to conventional marriage norms and utilise their wombs in a manner he deems fitting.
I was brought up in a household teeming with uniforms reflecting occupations in the military, police and religious sectors, as well as outfits indicative of members of the Girl Scouts and Catholic school. Medals of presidential bravery were also abundant in our household. Our pride in being Americans was fervent, and our sense of patriotism and religious devotion was palpable.
Yet, this man, who seems to shape his convictions to mirror his aspirations, asserts that I possess no vested interest in the United States. His suggestion seems to be that without women functioning as child-bearers and supportive partners, their American identity is incomplete. Such a viewpoint is not only un-American but also wholly reprehensible.
His hypocrisy shines through in his relationship with his accomplished wife, Usha, a litigator at a renowned legal firm and the daughter of immigrants from India. She is a Yale Law School alumna and held roles as a clerk for chief justices at the Supreme Court and the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit. Her professional standing sharply contradicts the backward persona her husband JD Vance projects politically.
Their marriage, undoubtedly contemporary, saw Vance fully embracing Usha’s Indian heritage by wearing a traditional Indian outfit for one of their wedding rituals. This irked the white supremacist supporters of Trump, such as Nick Fuentes, who implied doubt in Vance’s support for white identity due to his marriage with an Indian woman.
In response to such misgivings, Vance expressed his love for his wife. However, during his political campaigns, images he emanates appear to echo conservative Catholic ideologies propagated by like-minded factions such as the Heritage Foundation-Project 2025 supporters. These perspectives seem intent on relegating women’s roles exclusively to domestic duties and child-bearing.
In a prior speech, Vance suggested that parents should significantly influence democratic proceedings and benefit from increased voting power, as well as suggesting that childless Americans should bear the burden of higher taxes. Such statements point to a democratic deficit on his part, matching his running mate’s undemocratic leanings.
In 2022, Vance declared his intention for a nationwide abortion ban, a stance which he has now revised to correspond more closely with Trump’s view, allowing states to exercise their autonomy in this issue. However, there remain consternations surrounding the potential for a national prohibition following influences from the Christian right once gaining Presidential office.
During his Senate campaign, Vance voiced strong opinions on abortion, deeming it necessary for a federal intervention to halt inter-state travel for procuring abortions. He expressed fears of George Soros chartering a jumbo jet to facilitate ‘disproportionately black women’ to California for undergoing abortions.
Vance is set to introduce the impending book by Kevin Roberts, the Heritage Foundation’s president. Project 2025 aims at employing aggressive strategy to outlaw abortion, mifepristone, and impose restrictions on Plan B accessibility. The same group that previously had In vitro fertilisation (IVF) in their crosshairs are behind this aim.
Vance’s opposition to a Democratic bill safeguarding IVF last month was notable. Trump’s pick of Vance was purposefully strategised to incite cultural dissatisfaction against the educated and urban societies in rural settings and smaller towns. A clear opposition to Carrie Bradshaw!
Speaking from the perspective of an avid cat-affectionate and city dweller, the thought of Trump and Vance exercising control or expressing judgement on intimate choices for American women or belittling our life choices is unwelcome. This article, originally, was a feature in the New York Times.