Q for J.D. Vance: Since when do biologically childless women have no stake in the future of this country?
A few days ago, Trump’s veep selection J.D. Vance came up with a destined-to-be-classic utterance, joining a list of thoughtless remarks that famously undid candidates running for national office. He said that Kamala Harris, along with other women that have no biological children are “childless cat ladies” with “no direct stake in America.”
Vance (seen above in a public domain image posted on wikimedia commons) asserted that “we are effectively run in this country … by a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made, and so they wanna make the rest of the country miserable, too.”
This remark is lame enough to have drawn the criticism it deserves, so I’m being somewhat redundant by joining in the collective rebuke that has come Vance’s way, but, having been reared by a step-mom, I have to note that his ridiculous generalization about non-biological moms just doesn’t stand up to any scrutiny.
First off, Kamala Harris is a step-mom. Does Vance really believe that Harris is indifferent about the country’s future because her husband’s kids were not carried by her?
My own experience and that of so many other people I know that were brought up during a divorce situation contradicts Vance’s point that a woman has to be a biological mom to have a stake in the future of this country. My step-mother was intensely involved in the political and social affairs of her day.
Being of Armenian descent and living in Southern California, my parents made sure I attended public events that featured our local state rep, a fellow Armenian named George Deukmejian. My step-mom saw to it that I would shake his hand and visit with him at every opportunity. A couple of decades later when he became governor of California, long after my step-mom passed, I was reminded of her insistence that I get to know Deukmejian and other public officials whenever possible.
My step-mother had no biological children, but she knew that through me she had a stake in the future of her state and country.
I have no doubt that legions of step-moms have exerted the same influence on their families.
Same goes for adoptive moms. If anything, their decision to raise children that need homes speaks for itself in terms of their commitment to a positive future for their families, their communities and their country.
Vance’s narrow and negative categorization of women who haven’t made babies is really quite the slap in the face to women who’ve opted for non-biological versions of motherhood.
Beyond that, Vance’s presumptuous view that biologically childless women are miserable and want to impose their misery on the rest of the country isn’t just fatuous … it’s odious.
How does this guy know about the emotions of women who haven’t borne children? Nobody can be that omniscient.
And then, for Vance to assume that they want to force their feelings on to the rest of us is another absurdity.
It’s certainly solipsistic enough. If this keeps up, I have a feeling that J.D. Vance will be a prized asset to the Harris campaign.
John Tsitrian is a businessman and writer from the Black Hills. He was a weekly columnist for the Rapid City Journal for 20 years. His articles and commentary have also appeared in The Los Angeles Times, The Denver Post and The Omaha World-Herald. Tsitrian served in the Marines for three years (1966-69), including a 13-month tour of duty as a radioman in Vietnam. Republish with permission.
