Chicken Little Told Us So
Chicken Little syndrome is the state of passivity or paralysis that can result when repeated predictions of impending disaster do not come to pass.
I’m grieving again. It started when the leaked draft Supreme Court decision in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization was published, indicating Roe v Wade would be overturned. Today the decision was officially released, so I’m grieving again.
I’m also madder than a wet hen. Mad as Chicken Little, who tried to tell everyone the sky was falling, the sky was falling! Why would no one listen? Why would they? Listen to a lone chicken raising an alarm about something no one could see.
I’m so mad I don’t know who or what to aim at. I’m mad at everyone. Those on my own side as well as the other, and I’m mad at myself for that. I’ve been posting about abortion on Facebook for years and, instead of feeling buoyed by the flurry of posts I’m seeing now in my feed, from friends who haven’t posted about it before — instead I feel bitter, because it’s too late. I know that’s petty. I should appreciate their support, not judge them for being late to the game. But to be honest, I’m annoyed that they’re late to the game.
For all the years I’ve been observing the backlash to Roe v Wade — since the 1980s — friends have seemed baffled by my concerns. What are you yelling about abortion for? Why is that your single issue? It’s legal, settled law, law of the land. Anyway you’re in California, the sky’s never gonna fall here. And those are the liberal friends, who are supposed to be on my side, our side, the side of women.
I’m angry at every Democrat who has engaged in both side-ism, as if people on both sides of the battle over abortion rights are people of good faith, with sincerely held beliefs.
I’m angry at the notion that all views on abortion are to be respected. People who agitate against abortion rights freely and openly express contempt for my views. I will not pretend to respect theirs.
I’m angry at every Democratic politician who argued that there’s room in the party for those who oppose abortion rights. How? If you believe abortion is a right, as the party platform states, then access to that right shouldn’t be up for debate, or the subject of compromise, or dependent on the whims of the political party that happens to be in the majority in your state government.
Of course, I’m angry at Donald Trump, but since all he did was tell us exactly what he would do and then do it, I’m angrier at all the people who voted for him. I’m angriest at those who voted for Trump even though they liked nothing about him except his promise to pick judges who would overturn Roe — because that was what they wanted. I’m angry those people are getting what they wanted.
I’m angry at Senator Mitch McConnell, who denied a sitting president a Supreme Court Justice — a first in my lifetime — enabling Trump to start shaping the Court before he was even elected.
I’m angry at the Electoral College, for handing the presidential election not to the winner of the popular vote — the pro-choice Democrat I voted for — but to the Republican intent on rolling back women’s rights. Twice. Twice.
I’m angry that the woman who won more votes in 2016 than any candidate in a presidential election ever — the woman who beat her opponent by nearly three million votes and yet, because of the Electoral College, lost the election — I’m angry that woman is to this day blamed for the loss of that election.
I’m angry at every Democrat on Facebook who is still saying Donald Trump won because Hillary Clinton ran a lousy campaign… or didn’t go to Wisconsin… or made too much money for her speeches… or just wasn’t likeable. I’m angry they make even that out to be her fault — that they found an excuse not to vote for her, and instead chose to — what? — take a principled stand? A protest vote? When it was clear what the stakes were, for women.
I’m mad at the media for covering “the abortion debate” as if it’s a perpetual, unresolvable conversation about the personal feelings of individual politicians, and not a civil rights question that was settled by our highest court half a century ago.
I’ve been mad at Chris Wallace in particular since 2016, for the way he handled the issue in a presidential debate he moderated. Consider the contrast between the questions about abortion he posed to the two candidates:
“Mr. Trump, you’re pro-life. But I want to ask you specifically: Do you want the court, including the justices that you will name, to overturn Roe v. Wade, which includes — in fact, states — a woman’s right to abortion?”
“Secretary Clinton, I want to explore how far you believe the right to abortion goes. You have been quoted as saying that the fetus has no constitutional rights. You also voted against a ban on late-term, partial-birth abortions. Why?”
In a recent Zoom meeting of a local Democratic club, one member typed into the chat window that the call was getting depressing. We shouldn’t criticize Democrats for what they haven’t done in the past, she typed. We shouldn’t talk about it being too late, we should talk about what we can do now. I typed in reply, It should be okay to evaluate and critique previous strategies when we’re facing a reversal this big. We have to acknowledge, what we’ve been doing so far hasn’t worked, or we wouldn’t be where we are now. Then we can decide what to do next. Nobody answered.
Who wants to hear Chicken Little saying she told us so?
