Three days ago, a draft Supreme Court opinion was leaked to the press; the decision, if still true to leaked form, would overturn the consitutional right to an abortion enshrined by Roe v. Wade and Casey v. Planned Parenthood.
	Why?
	Anti-abortion activists would say they care deeply about what they believe is an valid baby human, but they all too frequently cease caring as soon as the fetus exits the unwilling mother. Principled constitutionalists, while not fervently anti-abortion as the activists, would say that the initial Supreme Court decisions should never have been made, as abortion is not a right explicitly enshrined in the constitution, but conveniently ignore the Court's prior history of judicial activism in times of social upheaval or indeed that the constitution does have the concept of "rights not enumerated" - rights enshrined only implicitly. Scary men would say that the forced birth is the mother's punishment for being a harlot or some other such horrible word; of the three groups, only this last one is internally consistent in its ideology.
	Imagine you are a scary man. Why do you want abortion criminalized?
	Sex before marriage is a sin, which is a bad thing. Sex results in pregnancy, which is a good thing. If a woman is unmarried and pregnant, she is a sinner and deserves all the pain and suffering that comes to her; if she is married, she is about to perform the wonderous act of bringing a new girl (blegh) or (you hope) boy into the world. Now introduce abortion: in the case of the unmarried woman, she is circumventing all the pain she so rightfully deserves, in the case of the married woman, she is unwilling to perform a wonderous act in the name of your god and is thus a heretic. In essence, abortion (and, not that you would ever admit it, all birth control) allows recreational sex, which is of the devil.
	Such scary men are all too common in the world; enough are able to embed themselves in the prior two, less-scary, groups or otherwise disguise their horribleness to cause serious problems.
	But why‽
	Why are there horrible men who hate women and pleasure and fun and themselves? Why do we force people to suffer needlessly? Why do we spend billions of dollars making brown people dead in the middle east and why do we spend millions bulldozing homeless encampments to erect sports stadiums? Why?
	I don't know. I cannot answer why some humans are so horrible, and I fear the kind of person I would be if I could.
---
	Back to Excession.
	I am no longer certain the Affront - the awful horrible squid people who's society is described as "a never ending holocaust of incomprehensible pain" - was not meant, in some way, to be an indictment of American society. Unrelentingly expansionist, technologically marvellous but still, for some idiot reason, built on needless suffering, and run by a bunch of asshole men.
	If given the chance, I am certain that some particularly horrible men would jump at the chance to make sex less pleasurable for women, and birth more painful, and other evil things.
---
	What initially brought me on to this topic was an excerpt of the draft in which Alito mentions BIPOC communities having a disproportionately high rate of abortions, and reasoning that abortions are racist because they kill more black babies. Perhaps it is no longer quite so foolish of me to assert that I understand socioeconomic factors better than a Supreme Court justice, or perhaps he understands as well as I do that BIPOC communities are generally poor, and that poor people get more abortions because it's cheaper than raising a child, and that abortion access is an intersectional issue, and is simply making flimsy excuses for himself.
	It should come as no surprise that a council of powerful old lawyers, at least one of whom has a string of assault allegations behind him, are against women's rights. It should come as no surprise, but still, I had somehow hoped differently.