Why the Hobby Lobby Decision is Good for Women (Part 1)

If you were down at the Supreme Court yesterday awaiting the Hobby Lobby decision, you might have noticed something interesting. The overwhelming majority of Hobby Lobby supporters were women.

Huh.

I thought Hobby Lobby was trying to oppress women.

They were trying to ban birth control.

They were trying to bring us back to the 1950s.

They were enforcing a patriarchal society where men make all the decisions about women’s reproductive choices.

Oh, there's me, looking very oppressed by the decision

But, then, why were most of the Hobby Lobby supporters women? I mean, even the mainstream media had to use pictures of women celebrating the decision when it came out. 

However, if you wandered over the pro-choice side, you saw something interesting. At least half of the supporters were men. The person leading their chants was a man. At one point, before he started to lead a chant, he leaned over to the women in front of him and said “do you want to be referred to as women or girls?” I had more than one pro-choice man get two inches from my face and scream about access to birth control.

But please, do tell us how Hobby Lobby is trying to oppress women.

Oh look, the all-female legal team! 

Despite what the media, or Planned Parenthood may lead you to believe, this decision was a good decision for women.  Despite one’s personal beliefs on contraception, our First Amendment guarantees the right to exercise our religious beliefs. To claim that women care more about their employer paying for their birth control than our own religious freedom is demeaning to all women. Over a third of the plaintiffs who have filed suit against the HHS mandate are women. The mandate hurts women business owners who were being forced to choose between their religious convictions and their own business. Thankfully, the Supreme Court recognized that this was an unfair burden to place on business owners.

It is also problematic to refer the HHS mandate as a huge advancement for women’s equality, as supporters of the mandate often do. The subtext is that if a woman wants to be successful or equal in the workforce, she must suppress her fertility, which is viewed as a hindrance to her goals and her fulfillment. Women are sent the message –  that there is something wrong with their bodies that needs correcting if they are to be equal. To be equal to men, they must become like men.

This view is demeaning to women. We are being told that if we even want to have the opportunity to achieve equality, we should be contracepting. We are told that if we do become pregnant, whether planned or unplanned, somehow we are unsuccessful, in effect we have failed.  If we choose to pursue motherhood, we are clearly not pursuing success – at least not as the government defines it.

If the government truly saw the choices for and against motherhood as equal, there would be more support for women who become pregnant. Contraception and abortion-inducing drugs and devices are offered for free through the HHS mandate, but not all pregnancy-related costs are covered. By only offering full coverage of options promoting the prevention or interruption of pregnancy, the government is sending a subtle but clear message about what it means to be a woman and what a woman's success looks like – and it doesn’t include her fertility.

So who declared the real war on women?

Stay tuned for the next blog post, where we will discuss what true women's healthcare should look like.