By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Following Donald Trump’s election victory, some liberal women are enacting a “sex strike” in protest. Inspired by a Korean feminist movement, this “4B movement” encourages women to withhold sex, dating, marriage, and childbearing from men for the next four years. This protest, fueled by the perceived threat to women’s rights under Trump’s presidency, aims to reclaim agency over their bodies and challenge the existing power dynamics. Women are sharing their pledges on social media, vowing to abstain from intimate relationships with men as a form of political activism.
Read the original article here
Following Donald Trump’s victory in the 2024 presidential election, a wave of outrage and frustration swept through certain segments of the female population. The election, which many saw as a referendum on abortion rights and women’s protections, fueled a movement that mirrored a similar campaign in South Korea known as the “4B Movement.” This movement, characterized by its four “no’s” – no sex, no dating or marriage, no children, and no support for men – found traction among American women deeply disillusioned by Trump’s policies and rhetoric.
Inspired by this movement, women took to social media, sharing videos and pledges to abstain from sexual intimacy with men. They saw this “sex strike” as a form of protest, a means of wielding their bodies as a tool to exert pressure and force change. The rationale was clear: if men weren’t going to respect their bodily autonomy, then they wouldn’t have access to their bodies. Some women even advocated for taking drastic measures like getting IUDs or having their tubes tied, not out of a desire to avoid intimacy, but as a precaution against the possibility of forced pregnancy in a world where abortion rights were under attack.
However, the movement faced its share of skepticism and criticism. Some argued that it was a simplistic and ineffective response, highlighting the fact that a significant portion of women, including a majority of white women, had voted for Trump. The effectiveness of such a strike was questioned, with many pointing out that the women who would participate in such a movement were likely already avoiding relationships with men who held Trump-supporting views.
Others criticized the movement for blaming men for Trump’s victory while overlooking the role of women in the election. This argument pointed towards the significant number of women who voted for Trump, suggesting that a significant percentage of women were comfortable with his policies and rhetoric.
Furthermore, the movement was seen as a form of social media activism, with critics questioning its effectiveness in creating real-world change. They argued that the act of changing one’s profile picture or posting a declaration on social media was ultimately a symbolic gesture with limited tangible impact.
The “sex strike” movement following Trump’s re-election served as a window into the complex emotions and frustrations of women in a deeply divided America. While the effectiveness of such a movement was questioned, it undoubtedly reflected the palpable sense of anger and fear that resonated within certain segments of the female population. The movement also exposed the intricate dynamics of gender politics in American society, highlighting the deep divisions and anxieties that exist on both sides of the aisle. It serves as a reminder that in a world grappling with issues like abortion access and women’s rights, the conversation about gender roles, power dynamics, and individual agency is far from over.