What Was Todd Akin Wearing?

After Representative Todd Akin (R-MO) displayed his belief on national television that women who were victims of “legitimate” rape rarely become pregnant because their bodies have “ways to try to shut that whole thing down,” the Republican party and its puppeteer super-pacmen en masse allegedly are forcing Mr. Akin to get out of the hotly-contested Senate race with Democrat and incumbent Senator Claire McCaskill. But Mr. Akin is the legitimate Republican Senate candidate, and is polling ahead of McCaskill by several points. What on earth was he wearing to provoke such an assault?

Turns out Rep. Akin is wearing the robes of Christian Dominionism, smartly accessorized by the newly minted draft of the 2012 Republican Party platform. But Christian supremacy and woman-hating have been the trending style elements of GOP fashion sense for forty years now. Surely the current Republican Party has no problem with such an ensemble, since so many elected Republicans sport similar outfits.

Rep. Akin was simply living his beliefs out, loud, and proud sashaying, if you will, on national television, letting it all hang out. What’s so wrong with that?

Oddly the Republican Party, commandeered as it is at the moment by men who do not believe in bodily sovereignty for women, doesn’t want to draw attention to this core principle. Shhhhh. Not right now, boys. We’re trying to win an election and we need the gals’ votes. It’s not that they disagree with Mr. Akin. It’s that they want to increase their power to advance their vision for the country.

Think I’m kidding? Listen closely to Mitt Romney’s carefully worded response when asked if he thought Rep. Akin should drop out of the Missouri Senate race: “He [Akin] needs to consider what’s in the best interest of the things he believes most deeply, what will help the country at this critical time.”

The Republican puppeteers fear the Missouri Senate seat might be the deciding factor between a Republican or Democratic Senate in 2013. To them, it doesn’t matter that they agree with or even admire Todd Akin’s stance on men raping women, and forcing women to complete a pregnancy resulting from rape. In order to advance the Grand Old Party’s grand old vision of institutionalizing misogyny [read: reinscribing male supremacy], a Republican-controlled Senate would be most useful.

Mr. Akin’s reckless exposure reveals too much skin, as it were, and attracts the unwanted attention of voters who can’t keep themselves from leering at the despicable reality of today’s Republican Party. As with Mr. Romney, the more they know the less they like. In this case, familiarity breeds contempt.

Of course, the other even more disturbing problem posed by Mr. Akin’s belief-vogueing is his collaboration during the 112th Congress with Paul Ryan on H.R. 103—the if-you’ve-got-the-majority-flaunt-it “No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act” passed by this Republican House—and fully seven more anti-women’s bodily sovereignty bills. H.R. 103 is notably famous for Mr. Ryan and Mr. Akin’s effort to redefine rape into categories: forcible rape and, um, she-didn’t-want-to rape.

Boys, boys! No more cleavage, please, and cover those tempting ankles while you’re at it. No exceptions.

What are burkas for, after all?

Advertisements

About meme_ster

Tracking power through language
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to What Was Todd Akin Wearing?

  1. Carol Plummer says:

    Amen memester—you hit this totally on the head!

  2. Marilyn says:

    The trouble is that he is appealing to those who believe the same way he does. They’ll go to the polls and put their X right there by his name. Where are the women in Missouri?

  3. meme_ster says:

    True dat, Marilyn. One hopes the number of voters who believe the same way he does is smaller than those who believe otherwise. The challenge is to make it clear to the full range of voters that these beliefs are not extreme or marginal anymore, but wholeheartedly embraced by the Republican Party proper, and central to their vision for the country as described in their platform. Then, the theory goes, the Democratic base will be mobilized to vote in great numbers, “independent”/undecided voters will vote for Democrats, and Republicans who are not batshit insane will make an effort to reclaim their party. Also important is dispelling the notion that there’s “no difference” between the parties, an indulgent belief of disaffected progressives and Occupy Wall Street activists. We can thank Mr. Akin for helping to heighten the contrast.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s