My problems with the Libertarian Party Can be Summed Up…

..in two words:

Ron Paul.  Okay, three, if you’d prefer to roll with “Ron Paul rEVOLution REVOlution.”

A manarchist must have been hanging out at Passyunk and Bainbridge.

Every time a member of Campaign for Liberty parrots off the “Ron Paul Loves Freedom” standard talking points, God kills a kitten, then Rickrolls some unsuspecting n00b, and then follows up by teaching some poor sap the meaning of shock image.  You know, I could believe it if it weren’t for the hit-you-over-the-head obvious fact that “Ron Paul Loves Freedom” is officially 100% old meme.

Well, that and if I weren’t female.

When members of the Libertarian party slobber all over Ron Paul, it sends a message to women (and queers and Mexicans) that not only is our participation unnecessary, but also that our issues are not ones rooted in freedom.  Before you jump on me, I’m quite aware that there’s got to be a few participants in the Ron Paul REVOlution who are Hispanic, gay, and/or female. I’m also quite aware that every time some poor “freedom loving” 9/11 truthing stereotype prattles on and on about how Ron Paul is Love Over Love it takes every ounce of composure I have to not lean in very closely and scream “Ron Paul doesn’t give a flying fuck about my freedom.”

Yes, I get it.  He cares about issues very near and dear to your average libertarian stereotype: guns, prostitution,  weed, and keeping basement apartments legal.  While I share your love for those things, dear freedom fighters, I also happen to think that having autonomy over my own body is super cool.  I’ll also go so far as to say that you cannot be pro-life and a libertarian.

Yeah, I said it and I’ll say it again in more explicit terms: if personal freedom and choice are the crux of the libertarian argument, then you are a hypocritical fuckwad if you are a pro-life libertarian.

I fail to see the logic in trusting me with an AK-47, but not trusting me to make the decision that is best for my life and my situation.  I fail to see the logic in arguing that I should have the right to shoot an intruder – defined as “someone who is not invited into my home” – but I can’t remove an unwanted fetus from my body.  I fail to see the logic in allowing me to have access to a fully automatic gun capable of popping off multiple rounds with the touch of a trigger, a weapon which exists only to hunt (humans), but having a medical procedure that doesn’t impact you is “murdering a baby.”  Trust me, hypocritical pro-life libertarian asswipes, me having sex with you is not an option, therefore it is 100% none of your damn business.

Every time a libertarian tells me that Ron Paul is “good 95% of the time,” my head wants to fucking explode, because I’m part of that 5%.  As a woman in a heterosexual relationship, it’s unfathomable that the LP or it’s members would support a man who has shown me that he does not view me as trustworthy as a man.  When you remove the right of women to control what happens in their own bodies, you are saying that I am inferior to a man, all because of that pesky xx thing.

The fucked up shit is that, if you were to listen only to people like Catherine Seipp, you’d think that abortion was irrelevant.  Right, because there are absolutely no reasons why pro-freedom individuals should give a rat’s ass about abortion.  It’s not as if it’s another form of governmental oppression waged against a group of citizens.  If you want me to be 100% perfectly honest, this is a large reason why I have the nagging feeling that many of the female contributors on Reason are essentially affirmative action hires.  Their writing skills are nowhere near on par with the male contributors, and when speaking about feminism, it is clearly that they often haven’t pulled their heads out of their asses long enough to read a damn book or academic article about feminism. Instead, they figure that a Google search or two, and some recollections of some feminist stereotypes will be enough to write a thorough criticism.  Besides, it’s not like chicks can perpetuate misogyny, right?

In a libertarian context, freedom and liberty should be the most important aspects of any issue.  Period.  Given that I could lose my job during my pregnancy due to my inability to perform it while pregnant, I could be pregnant with a Tay-Sachs baby, I could be making too little to support myself and a baby without taking government aid, I could have taken every reasonable precaution to prevent pregnancy, or, like many a gun owner, I could just not want to be pregnant at this time, I don’t understand how abortion is not an issue of freedom.  All of these are valid reasons for an abortion (as are a million others).  Why are the same libertarians who argue that compulsory tax legislation is anti-freedom often so resistant to treating abortion like an issue of personal freedom?  Most concerning, though, is why is abortion being re-framed as a left v. independent issue?

As I said on Twitter, feminism and libertarianism are not mutually exclusive.  If you support the core argument of feminism, that women deserve equal opportunities to men, and you support one of the core arguments of libertarianism, that the government has no right to infringe upon your freedom, then they seem to work together far more often than they pull one another apart. My body and my right to determine what goes into or stays out of it are not political fodder.  Or, to put it more simply, either you love freedom, or you don’t.  If you do, that might mean having to accept things you don’t really like, that make you uncomfortable, or that gross you out.

I can accept that that a society with minimal government means garbage I don’t personally support will be legal.  Why can’t you accept it when it pertains to my life?

—-

If you’re reading this from my Facebook notes, please go to the original blog post (located here) to comment.