In a recent audio clip, Ohio Senator JD Vance made inflammatory comments that have raised eyebrows, once again putting him in the spotlight for his controversial views. The statement was targeted at Randy Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, one of the country’s most prominent teacher unions. Vance, in a broad swipe, accused Weingarten of attempting to “brainwash and destroy the minds of children,” asserting that because she doesn’t have children of her own, she should “leave ours the hell alone.” This isn’t the first time Vance has said something strange or troubling, particularly regarding women and children, and it likely won’t be the last.
A Pattern of Inflammatory Rhetoric
Vance’s rhetoric fits neatly into a broader, more disturbing pattern of conservative figures attacking women who don’t conform to traditional gender roles. His comments about Weingarten, while specifically targeting her position on education, hinge on the outdated and misogynistic notion that a woman’s worth or capability is defined by motherhood. Vance’s statement implies that childless women have no place in deciding educational policy—a troubling and exclusionary argument that ignores the complex qualifications and experiences people like Weingarten bring to the table. Reducing a woman’s role or opinions to whether or not she has children reflects a conservative undercurrent that seeks to limit women’s agency in both public and private spheres.
This is not the first time Vance has made bizarre or sexist remarks in public. He has consistently aligned himself with extreme social views, many of which revolve around rigid notions of family and gender roles. In fact, his fixation on the family unit—defined narrowly and traditionally—has often come at the expense of nuance, diversity, and the changing realities of modern life.
Unearthed audio: JD Vance says teachers who do not have biological children “disorient and really disturb” him: “She should have some of her own [children]” pic.twitter.com/Rqx2PLfjT5
— Kamala HQ (@KamalaHQ) August 27, 2024
Stay up-to-date with the latest news!
Subscribe and start recieving our daily emails.
The Troubling Focus on Women’s Choices
Vance’s statements reveal a deep discomfort with the autonomy of women, especially those in power. By attacking Weingarten on the basis of her not having children, he shifts the conversation away from her policies and qualifications and makes it about her personal life choices. This is a common tactic among conservative politicians, who often weaponize personal circumstances, especially those of women, to invalidate their opinions and discredit their authority. It’s as if by not being a mother, Weingarten loses her credibility in discussing education and child welfare. This not only undermines the expertise of countless professionals who work with children but also diminishes the contributions of women in general, placing them in a box that Vance and others like him are determined to keep tightly sealed.
His Past Comments: A Long History of Missteps
Vance’s comments on Weingarten follow a long line of bizarre and, frankly, inappropriate statements. For example, earlier in his political career, he suggested that women should stay in violent marriages for the sake of the family. Speaking at a conservative conference, Vance claimed, “This is one of the great tricks that I think the sexual revolution pulled on the American populace, which is the idea that like, ‘Well, okay, these marriages were fundamentally, you know, they were maybe even violent, but certainly they were unhappy. And so divorce was the best thing for people.’” Vance essentially argued that keeping families together is more important than the well-being of women trapped in abusive relationships, a view that drew sharp criticism from advocates for domestic violence survivors .
Such comments indicate a broader discomfort with the autonomy of women, whether it’s their choice to have children, to work, or to leave dangerous situations. Vance’s worldview, rooted in rigid traditionalism, doesn’t seem to account for the complex and often difficult decisions that women must make. Instead, he often defaults to blaming societal changes, particularly feminism and the sexual revolution, for the erosion of what he sees as core American values.
Political Convenience or Deep Belief?
Vance’s comments on Weingarten also raise the question: Does he truly believe these things, or is this simply another political performance designed to appeal to the far-right conservative base? His past actions suggest it might be both. Vance has made a career out of presenting himself as an outsider with a deep understanding of the working class, but his solutions often lean on tired conservative talking points rather than offering fresh ideas. In this case, rather than engage with the nuanced debates surrounding education policy and the role of teacher unions, he opts for a cheap, personal attack designed to rally his base.
A Disturbing Trend
JD Vance’s recent attack on Randy Weingarten is troubling, not just because of its personal nature but because it’s part of a larger pattern. Vance seems unable to separate his extreme views on family and women from his policy positions, often conflating the two in a way that is harmful to both. His views on women’s roles, particularly their right to choose their paths in life—whether it’s working in education, staying in a marriage, or having children—are not only outdated but dangerous. The Ohio Senator continues to reveal himself as a politician unwilling to engage in the complexities of modern life, preferring instead to fall back on divisive, backward-looking rhetoric that has no place in today’s society.
Featured Image via Political Tribune Gallery
