The Indian Express (Delhi Edition)

In defence of cats and ‘ cat women’

DAYS AFTER Kamala Harris emerged as the presumptiv­e Democratic nominee for the US President’s post, pitting her against Republican candidate Donald Trump, some unfortunat­e comments made by his running mate J D Vance made headlines. Speaking in a 2021 interview, Vance had said the US was being run by “a bunch of childless cat ladies who are miserable at their own lives and the choices that they’ve made, and so they want to make the rest of the country miserable too”.

Harris is the Vice- President of the most powerful country in the world, a former senator from California and the former attorney- general of the same state. She is also the daughter of migrants, a woman of colour, someone who got married for the first time at the age of 50 and has no biological children.

Many have taken Vance’s comment and run with it. In their opinion, Harris is “miserable” despite the fact that she has a tremendous­ly successful career, is happily married and has two step- children, who have often spoken of how fond they are of “Momala”.

Vance’s comments are not surprising in the least, as Republican­s have made no secret of their antipathy towards female agency. They are suspicious of women who are childless by choice, who seek meaning in life differentl­y than others and who are bewildered at being the object of pity for making a choice that is, ultimately, only theirs to make.

This is not the first time the Republican­s have come after women’s choices. After successful­ly gutting abortion rights in 2022, they openly spoke of their plans to ban multiple forms of contracept­ion, as well as IVF. They presumably don’t want women to have sexual or reproducti­ve rights.

There isn’t enough ink in the world to write about the unrealisti­c standards a woman in public life is held to and the depths to which her actions are scrutinise­d, compared to male politician­s. But beyond the undeniable misogyny and sexism, there is another issue with Vance’s comments. They are not only offensive to independen­t women everywhere, they are also offensive to cat parents and cats.

Just like such diatribe is always directed towards “childless women with cats”, not “childless men with cats”, why are only cats and cat parents subjected to such stereotypi­ng? What about childless women who have pet dogs or hamsters or a horse?

Is it because dogs are more affectiona­te and loyal, so there is some inherent credit in having one as a pet? I am simply wondering how cats attract such a bad reputation, to be forever associated with a group of women who are no doubt living their best lives, but are still treated as ‘ incomplete projects’ by most of society. Is it because all cats secretly hate their owners, respond to affection with contempt and act like they are plotting to murder you? Is it because cats are considered cold and uncaring, the same traits society gleefully attributes to their ‘ miserable’ female owners?

Women, just like most men, live lives that are a tapestry of complex choices, personal conviction­s and unwinnable circumstan­ces. There is no linear equation to living life, where just because having children equals massive joy, childlessn­ess equals pure despondenc­y. Women who don’t fit in socially sanctioned roles don’t really spend all their time being miserable.

Women whose life choices you don’t approve of also live rich, fulfilling and complicate­d lives. Constantly attacking them for those choices and projecting your misery on them doesn't dent their happiness, but it does reveal a gaping hole in your othe wise well- manicured existence.