Actually It’s Good That Fewer High Schoolers Want to Get Married

High schoolers, and especially high school girls, are less likely than ever to say that they want to get married someday, according to new research from Pew Research Center. While boys have stayed fairly stable in how many of them say they want to marry, girls have gone from overwhelmingly wanting marriage to being even less likely than boys to want to wed.

Conservative groups and writers have met this new survey with some panic. If 12th graders don’t want to get married, I guess the logic goes, then they won’t get married, and America’s declining rates of marriage and childbearing will continue and will eventually destroy society. To them, this new survey indicates a broader social shift away from marriage and childbearing, which is bad, because in their view, the nuclear family is the good and necessary backbone of any moral and functional culture. 

But actually, it’s great that far fewer high school girls are even thinking about marriage.

The teenage girls who are thinking about their weekends instead of their weddings? They’re doing something right. 

Keeping Score: No Kings Protest Turnout Makes History; SCOTUS Threatens Voting Rights; Gen Z Women Are Most Liberal in U.S.

In every issue of Ms., we track research on our progress in the fight for equality, catalogue can’t-miss quotes from feminist voices and keep tabs on the feminist movement’s many milestones. We’re Keeping Score online, too—in this biweekly roundup.

This week:
—No Kings Day marks the largest single-day protest in American history.
—The ongoing government shutdown could soon disrupt SNAP benefits, another unprecedented moment in U.S. history. “We have never seen our government turn on its people this way,” said Abby Leibman, president and CEO of MAZON.
—House Democrats rebuke Pete Hegseth’s hostility towards women in the military.
—Speaker Mike Johnson refuses to swear in newly elected Democrat, Rep. Adelita Grijalva.
—Return-to-office policies are pushing women out of the workforce.
—Remembering legendary trans activist Miss Major Griffin-Gracy.
—The Supreme Court heard arguments challenging the Voting Rights Act.

… and more.

Who Gets to Procreate and Parent? A Black Feminist Critique of the Pronatalist Agenda

Pronatalism is not simply about encouraging births—it is a political project rooted in racism and control. Its goal is to engineer a future that permits only certain people to bear and raise children while coercing or punishing others for reproducing or parenting.

Adriana Smith’s experience of coerced reproduction is a devastating example: a Black nurse and mother declared brain-dead, yet kept on life support for months to sustain her pregnancy under Georgia’s restrictive abortion laws. This is what pronatalism looks like in practice—the state asserting ownership over a Black woman’s body.

As Black feminists, we understand that reproductive choices are personal, but they are also deeply shaped by structural power. Pronatalist leaders and influencers cloak their agenda in the language of family and morality, but in truth, they seek to restrict autonomy and consolidate control. Reproductive justice, by contrast, insists on every person’s right to decide whether and how to have children, and to parent in safety and dignity.

Meanwhile, at the FDA: Menopause Progress, Abortion Gaslighting

The FDA caused a stir last week when it approved a new, generic version of mifepristone—the abortion medication that has safely, effectively and privately ended pregnancies for 25 years. Many mainstream outlets made it sound like a dramatic policy reversal, but really it was a procedural box check. Meanwhile, the Trump administration is already laying the groundwork to undermine access, announcing a so-called “safety review” based on flawed data and false claims. As reproductive rights advocates like Mini Timmaraju have pointed out, this is gaslighting—pretending to be moderate while plotting restrictions. That’s why protecting mifepristone still matters now.

At least there was some progress this week in menopause care: The FDA signaled plans to remove the “black box” warning on certain hormone treatments that has long stoked fear and confusion. Experts say the label was based on outdated science and has caused real harm, leaving countless women to suffer unnecessarily. For once, the agency seems poised to get this one right.

‘We Need Equal Rights in the Constitution’: NOW’s New Leaders Kim Villanueva and Rose Brunache See ‘a Lot of Energy for Advocacy’

Almost 60 years ago, in 1966, Pauli Murray, a queer Episcopal priest and legal scholar, approached noted feminist Betty Friedan about the need for an organization to push the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to enforce the Civil Rights Act. Although the Act had passed in 1964 and banned discrimination based on race, color, national origin, sex, and religion, Murray understood that the law’s promise would remain unfulfilled without vigilance and pressure from activists. Friedan agreed, and later that year, the National Organization for Women (NOW) was created.

Newly-installed president Kim Villanueva—the former president of NOW’s Illinois chapter, cofounder of the Asian American and Pacific Islander Caucus and chair of the National Election Committee—and vice president Rose Brunache, former president of the DC chapter, spoke to Ms. reporter Eleanor J. Bader one month after taking office.

Vile Reactions to Strong Women Can’t Silence Our Voices

Being on the receiving end of yet another violent and targeted email from a stranger hit a little differently this week, as the nation grapples with the murder of Charlie Kirk and its fallout.

Mostly what I’m feeling since receiving an email from Robert G. Smith—who signs off as “Bonecrusher Bob”—is a deep sense of obligation to the girls and women in my life. In his message, he attacked me with grotesque language, mocking my intelligence, my sexuality and my writing on menopause, telling me to “stick to brainwashing the little insurrectionist bastards who attend [my] shithouse skool.”

Much of my work is about developing leaders—running a law school center and fellowship program, mentoring high school and college students to become public writers, and helping grassroots leaders use the op-ed as a tool for advocacy. My own writing shines a light on women’s health issues that have long been ignored, like menopause, highlighting not just problems but solutions lawmakers can get behind.

The Bonecrusher Bobs of the world will not deter me, and I see the same resilience in those around me.

Just this past weekend, a teenager I mentor asked how to handle an op-ed she’d drafted about aggressive masculinity at her school; my answer was simple: We keep raising our voices with conviction, exposing lies, and showing up fully as ourselves. And when necessary, yes, we share screenshots.

Trump’s Pronatalist Agenda Weaponizes Motherhood to Push Women Out of Public Life

The Trump administration is using one of the oldest tools of patriarchy—promising rewards for compliance—through a wave of proposed pronatalist policies designed to push women into motherhood and encourage them to give birth to more children.

A recent report by the National Women’s Law Center warns that these proposals are not random: They stem from an “obscure, dangerous, and increasingly influential movement of ‘pronatalists’” that are now dictating the Trump administration’s family policy. 

According to NWLC, there are two major groups of pronatalists: Silicon Valley tech elites, such as Elon Musk, who claim that “high-IQ” people like themselves should be having more children; and traditional conservatives, who advocate for pushing women back into stay-at-home motherhood.

Sacrificing Women for the Church of Men: Medical Conscience Rights and Christian Hypocrisy

The Woman grew up in a small Christian town in northeastern Tennessee. Community values—kindness, compassion, love—are deeply cherished. She’s never moved; why would she? She enjoys the simplicity of her little community.

But the tide turns with a growing political movement seemingly predicated on bigotry and punitive, hypocritical morality. The news cycle churns frenetically, each day bearing more distressing confusion.

Her state representatives are unresponsive to your concerns, and she has a serious one: She’s pregnant and unmarried in post-Roe America, and cannot get care in her state. Legally, a doctor can decline to provide care for you.

She’s not trying to cause problems. But she’s terrified and she wants answers. How did we get here as a nation? And can we ever go back?

A grave truth transcends: Christian fundamentalism has insidiously inserted itself into American policy, perverting its own values to legalize discrimination.

Bigotry doesn’t always present as a Unite the Right rally or violence in our nation’s capital. Sometimes, it comes with a demure smile and a sweet, “It’s just my personal belief.” It’s still bigotry.

Why Is the Vice President Sitting Like That?

That awkward posture isn’t accidental. When Vance spreads his legs and plops down for an interview, he is directly addressing young men. He wants to prove that he’s just one of the guys, while also issuing a dire warning. “The boys,” he asserts, are under attack.

Advancements in women’s rights have always been followed by countermovements, each one lamenting, “But what about the boys?”

In reality, the cure for loneliness can’t be found in calling your friends the f-word or finding a “trad wife” who will stay in her place. It requires genuine relationships. It’s about having your feelings valued but with the equal expectation of emotional reciprocity. Behold and be held. That’s the deal.

Guys: You all, like all people, deserve to be loved. The problem is, the messengers who claim to be your friends are lying. Those guys don’t love you. They love their power over you.

Ms. on Men: Rethinking Masculinity in the Wake of the 2025 Election

When the editors of Ms. asked me to guest-edit “Ms. on Men,” a feature section in the latest print issue highlighting key issues related to men and masculinity, I knew this was more than a symbolic gesture—it was a necessary intervention.

In the wake of the 2025 election, with a growing number of young men embracing right-wing populism, we need a pro-feminist vision of masculinity rooted in justice, not grievance. This section brings together voices committed to that vision, offering both critique and possibility.

The first piece from the feature—going live on MsMagazine.com early Friday, July 25—will answer the question we’ve all been pondering: Why is the vice president sitting like that?