This is the crux of it: fertile women of child-bearing years having sex. 
Lysistrata comes to mind.
Yeah, it was a comedy, but a general sex strike would get everyone’s attention. I’m not joking.
Didn’t seem to be enough back in 2016, even though an overturn or at least weakening of RvW seemed obvious with a Trump win.
Maybe this time will be different, now that it’s actually happened.
The problem with a sex strike is that the women who would participate - namely, pro-choice women - probably only have pro-choice boyfriends or husbands to begin with. Meanwhile, anti-abortion women would keep boffing their husbands or boyfriends, with no reason to participate in the sex strike.
In other words, the strike wouldn’t change people’s minds since it’s not affecting the men who need their mind changed.
Buttery males.
But let’s not hijack.
There is enough time between now and the midterms to at least begin to see what all of the ramifications are going to be. And that may swing the tide for the election.
There is a gender gap in opinions on abortion, with men about 6 percent more likely (41/35) than women to want most abortions outlawed.
But in almost all polls the gender gap for support of Biden vs Trump is a bit higher.
Maybe you are correct here. But thinking about median women voters, I wonder if they are more likely to be conflicted on abortion rights than some other issues. The gender gap on gun rights is several times higher than on abortion.
The issue isn’t only women voters. The issue is also the people, of any gender, who haven’t been voting.
Women on the Waves has used ships in international waters.
States? Hmm, Texas maybe? I hear the Uvalde PD isn’t busy…
The simple reality is if it was that animating an issue, elections would have gone differently. They haven’t. The reality is a significant number of people (including a significant number of women) do not choose to vote based on abortion law, and that it is probably wishful thinking to think that changes through some magical process. The Republicans and the religious right built the pro-life movement through many years of concerted effort, the Democrats and the pro-choice movement are decades behind, and I simply don’t think the movement magicks itself into existence to meaningfully fight this issue, it will take real political work, and that will mean time, money, and persuasion.
Bingo. It was manifestly obvious to anyone with a functioning brain that if Trump won in '16, with Scalia’s seat open, Kennedy nearing retirement, and RBG an octogenarian cancer survivor, that RvW was at massive risk. In many areas of the country where Democrats had previously had decent turnout, HRC votes came in short. We have to guess at least some of those were pro-choice suburban types of either sat at home or decided to vote Trump anyway.
I want to offer something “into the record,” as it were.
The Guttmacher Institute’s September 2019 Fact Sheet, titled, " Induced Abortion in the United States:"
It’s clear, concise, and – for anybody who doesn’t pay much attention to this issue beyond the talking points of the talking heads – I think it’s highly informative.
It’s already bulleted and a pretty quick read, so no need to summarize or excerpt here, but I’ll list the major headings:
- WHO HAS ABORTIONS?
- PROVIDERS AND SERVICES
- MEDICATION ABORTION
- SAFETY OF ABORTION
- INSURANCE COVERAGE AND PAYMENT
- TRAVEL AND LOGISTICAL BARRIERS
Much like the other incendiary social wedge issue that SCOTUS weighed in on this week, it all starts with some basic agreement on solid and pertinent data.
Unlike that other issue, we actually have that data on abortion.
As a nation that can no longer reach agreement on a basic set of objective facts, ISTM that it’s good for any of us who feel strongly on this issue to familiarize ourselves with the facts that we do have.
I’d also like to point out – from the article – that about ten years ago, the rate at which people in the US had abortions – steadily declining since the passage of Roe – had declined to pre-Roe levels, and continued(s) to decline:
https://www.guttmacher.org/sites/default/files/styles/scale_900x720/public/462-550.png?itok=z4U4QuMB
IMHO there’s only one thing that can be done to overturn this decision. Make sure that both a Democrat is POTUS and that the senate stays under Democratic control for the next 20 years. By that time Thomas and Alito will likely have died from natural causes. The only other solution that doesn’t lead to mass chaos is a constitutional amendment, which is extremely unlikely.
Recall that today’s decision contains language from Clarence Thomas indicating his enthusiasm for taking away any federal right to contraceptives. Other Justices may have been less open about such ambitions in this particular decision, but it would be foolish to assume they have no interest in joining Thomas.
If contraception is outlawed (either state by state or federally) that will certainly change the statistics on the prevalence of abortion (as an illegal but still-occurring procedure).
I wonder how much of that is because of steady, if slow, increases in the average distance to the nearest abortion clinic.
It would take a lot of pouring over state and local abortion statistics to know. Sounds like a doable masters thesis.
It’s also worth pointing out that this is likely not because some states discovered workarounds to RvW to make abortion harder. Oregon has some of the laxest abortion laws in the country and yet follows the same pattern:
http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/policy/abortion/usa/ab-usa-OR.html
The chart is not as nice as a graph, but the pattern is still clear: a peak of 29.1% in 1979, with a drop to 13.9% today.
I think the idea that contraception will be outlawed is pretty much the progressive equivalent of American gun-owners thinking we are going to grab away firearms they legally own today.
The other options would be to try passing a federal abortion rights law and see how the current SCOTUS handles it, or to pack the court.
There’s been a huge drop in teenage pregnancy since 1990 and an increase in the average age women get pregnant, a lot (but not all, obviously) of unwanted pregnancies occur among the very young.