A DC community organizer holds a sign for the Light Brigade for Reproductive Justice: Your Vote is Your Voice outside of the US Supreme Court on October 17, 2024.
(Paul Morigi / Getty Images for SPACEs In Action)
On January 20, Mississippi state Senator Bradford Blackmon introduced “The Contraception Begins at Erection Act,” a provocative bill that would make it illegal for men to masturbate “without the intent to fertilize an embryo.” The bill is an attempt to flip the script on restrictive reproductive regulations by targeting the often ignored partners of the people who become pregnant and are forced by the state’s abortion ban to carry their pregnancy to term. But, like so many similar bills that have come before it, it’s severely lacking for the moment we are in.
Under the proposed legislation, men would face financial penalties of between $1,000 and $10,000 for violations, except in cases of sperm donation and contraception use to prevent fertilization. “All across the country, especially here in Mississippi, the vast majority of bills relating to contraception and/or abortion focus on the woman’s role when men are fifty percent of the equation,” the Democrat explained in a statement.“ This bill highlights that fact and brings the man’s role into the conversation. People can get up in arms and call it absurd, but I can’t say that bothers me.”
Unlikely to advance in the Republican-held legislature, the Contraception Begins at Erection Act is a symbolic gesture not unlike proposals introduced in other states that aim to illuminate perceived gender disparities in sexual and reproductive rights. For example, in 2020, Alabama state Representative Rolanda Hollis, a Democrat representing the 58th district, introduced House Bill 238. This bill proposed that men undergo a vasectomy within one month of their 50th birthday or after the birth of their third biological child, whichever occurred first. And in 2017, Texas state Representative Jessica Farrar, a Democrat from Houston, introduced House Bill 4260, known as the “Man’s Right to Know Act.” This bill proposed regulations for men’s health and safety, including creating a civil penalty for unregulated masturbatory emissions. The legislation attempted to mirror the medically unnecessary requirements imposed on people seeking abortions, such as mandatory counseling and waiting periods, to emphasize the perceived imbalance in reproductive regulations. Neither bill advanced in their respective state’s legislative process.
While Republicans were strategically advancing and enacting legislation to curtail reproductive rights, this was the type of political maneuvering that the Democrats were and still are engaging in. Rather than writing bold, forward-thinking policies that would actually confront the increasing restrictions to bodily autonomy, Democratic legislators, particularly those in states with Republican majorities, resort to reactive bills in an attempt to galvanize their base of constituents, showing them that “look, we are doing something.” Except these bills only serve to perpetuate the very systems of bodily regulation the sponsors seek to critique. When people are being left to die due to inhumane abortion bans, as healthcare systems crumble in the wake of a police state that holds not only patients but healthcare workers captive, is this really the best that the Democrats can do?
Even if it’s just a reaction to harmful legislation, the Democrats who support sexual and reproductive rights should not be introducing legislation that regulates sexual behaviors. Doing so only affirms the notion that it’s acceptable for governments to control what individuals do with their bodies.
What makes measures like Blackmon’s especially harmful is that they normalize state surveillance and the expansion of government control over deeply personal aspects of individuals’ lives. Proposals like these invite further overreach, essentially creating new avenues for the state to monitor and regulate private behaviors under the guise of moral or social oversight.
When the government becomes empowered to further regulate personal choices, more groups will inevitably find themselves subject to invasive surveillance. Historically, marginalized communities, including Black and brown individuals, queer and trans people, and low-income populations, have borne the brunt of such surveillance. These measures risk exacerbating existing inequities.
This tendency for Democrats to react rather than be proactive reflects a broader political issue. Rather than championing inclusive, visionary solutions, such as a Mississippi version of the federal Abortion Justice Act, which, unlike other policy proposals, creates a vision for a future with reproductive freedom and justice, the Democrats often resort to mirroring the strategies of Republican lawmakers as a means of making a political point. Meanwhile the real-world impact continues to devastate those in need of care. Abortion clinic workers in states where abortion is legal are bearing the overwhelming burden of high patient volumes and strained clinic capacities, while abortion funds are inundated with an overload of patients seeking assistance. Even states like Illinois, typically seen as a safe haven for abortion access, are grappling with clinic closures.
The political landscape has undergone a profound shift, not only in the aftermath of Dobbs, but also in the context of the Trump 2.0 era. This period demands a strategic departure from the traditional political back-and-forth that has long defined the Democratic response to attacks on abortion access. Republicans have already made clear their intentions and outlined their plans for the Trump era, advancing measures that systematically erode sexual and reproductive rights. In fact, one of the first moves Trump made since taking office was reinstating the Global Gag Rule, which restricts funding to sexual and reproductive health organizations overseas providing abortion counseling or services.
If the Democrats are truly serious about protecting reproductive rights and advancing access like they say they are during critical election cycles, they must rise above reactive politics.
The “Contraception Begins at Erection Act” may have generated discourse, but it won’t bring us closer to comprehensive reproductive justice. We are already facing the worst political climate for achieving reproductive freedom and bodily autonomy, and addressing the moment we are in requires bolder, transformative policy proposals and solutions. This includes being more proactive in ensuring previous precedent, like the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, remain in place and enforced; pushing back against unnecessary regulations that restrict access to care; allocating state and local funds to abortion funds; passing protections for abortion clinics; and ensuring access to gender-affirming care.
We deserve more than symbolic gestures; we deserve meaningful action that ensures reproductive freedom for all.
