No dating. No marriage. No sex. No kids.
These are the four tenets of the 4B movement, a South Korean feminist initiative gaining traction among American women.
Originating almost a decade ago, 4B translates to no marriage (bi-hon), no childbirth (bi-chulsan), no dating (bi-yeonae) and no sex with men (bi-seksue). American women resurrected the movement after the election, accusing men of waging a war on women.
Or, more accurately, refusing to elect a pro-abortion candidate for president.
The American 4B movement collectively believes pro-life policies and candidates encroach upon women’s “right” to unlimited abortion access. Adherents blame these violations on men, whom it claims are inherent oppressors of women.
Some converts see 4B as a way to punish their male overlords. Others hope decreasing birth rates will convince men to “protect women” — i.e. support abortion access — in future elections.
Happily, by reducing extramarital sex, 4B followers are reducing abortions — and supporting the pro-life cause.
The vast majority of abortions (95%) aren’t medically necessary. They occur because the baby is “unwanted or mistimed,” meaning the feels she mother cannot, or is unwilling to, care for her child.
These pregnancies primarily occur outside the confines of marriage, which provides critical economic and social infrastructure for raising children. This is evidenced, in part, by the advantages children raised in two-parent households experience over children from single-parent or cohabiting households.
Research compiled by sociologist Brad Wilcox and family studies scholar Alan J. Hawkins found children with married parents were far less likely to experience social and emotional problems like depression and far more likely to pursue higher education. According to Wilcox and Hawkins, these social disparities are only increasing.
Married families also experience more economic stability than single-parent or cohabiting homes. Wilcox and Hawkins found children with married parents four times less likely to experience poverty than those with single or unmarried parents. The findings echo those of economist Melissa Kearney, who writes,
Marriage socially and financially equips couples to have children. Outside this support system, pregnancy becomes a daunting obstacle many women choose to abort rather than face. If the 4B movement truly decreases extramarital sex, pro-lifers should be thrilled.
That being said, the 4B movement’s accidental protection of preborn babies doesn’t erase its ideological opposition to life and women.
That’s right — for all its feminist aspirations, the 4B movement is not pro-women. All available historical and sociological evidence suggest women thrive in partnership with men, not isolation from them.
Feminists have made this mistake before. In the 1960s and 70s, many predicted affordable birth control and abortion access, combined with better access to education and jobs, would increase women’s economic welfare.
Instead, many fell into poverty.
In 1978, Professor Diana Pearce, the director of the Center for Women’s Welfare at the University of Washington, wrote, “Poverty is rapidly becoming a female problem.”
Pearce noted this so-called “feminization of poverty” coincided with a 40%, single-generation jump in single mothers. But it wasn’t until the 1990s that Nobel Prize-winning economist George Akerlof connected the increase in women’s poverty to the disconnection of men from their reproductive responsibilities. Birth control and abortion, he posited, gave men no incentive to marry or support women they impregnated. The resulting decrease in “shotgun weddings” meant more single mothers and fewer economic prospects for women.
The “feminization of poverty” illustrated what would come to be a well-tested sociological phenomenon. Maggie Gallagher, a Yale-educated single mother turned pro-family researcher and activist, puts it this way:
Gallagher came to this conclusion in 2000. More than two decades later, Wilcox and Hawkins’ report confirms married men and women are economically, socially, mentally and even physically better off than their unmarried or divorced peers.
These benefits held up during one of the most economically and socially stressful periods in recent history — the pandemic.
According to the 2020 American Family Survey measuring women’s life satisfaction, married mothers were fare more likely to report being somewhat or completely satisfied with their life (83.55%) than childless women (60.75%), mothers (68.48%) and unmarried mothers (49.34%).
Married mothers also exceeded their peers in complete life satisfaction, with 38.52% reporting being completely satisfied compared to only 12.93% of childless women, 25.93% of mothers and 19.39% of unmarried mothers.
Gallagher says it best:
These benefits only accrue in partnership with men. By categorically ostracizing men as oppressive, the American 4B movement and its adherents reveal one of two things: either they don’t care about bettering women’s lives, or they have not seriously researched ways to do so.
Happily, 4B’s deeply misguided ideology doesn’t negate its pro-life benefits. If fewer women engage in premarital sex, fewer preborn children will be killed. And that’s always something to celebrate.
Additional Articles and Resources
Important New Research on How Married Parents Improve Child Well-Being
Family Scholars Explain the Current Marriage Paradox in America
Brad Willcox Exhorts Young People to ‘Get Married’
Cohabitation Still Harmful – Even as Stigma Disappears
Don’t Believe the Modern Myth. Marriage Remains Good for Women
Don’t Believe the Modern Myth. Marriage Remains Good for Men.
Myths Persist: Pop Culture Wrongly Steers Women Away From Marriage
Yes, Married Mothers Really Are Happier Than Unmarried and Childless Women
Married Fatherhood Makes Men Better
Marriage and the Public Good: A New Manifesto of Policy Proposals