Those 79% are irrelevant, what would be relevant is the opposite, which percentage of men are opposed to abortion, not how many of the people opposed to abortion are men.
Irrelevant to what? It’s fair to say she is clearly Pro-Choice, so understanding the demographics of those who are anti-choice is very relevant. Especially if your point is that “since 4 out of 5 people opposed to abortion rights are men, who will not be directly affected by these laws, their opinion is functionally irrelevant”.
Or are you just upset that this fails to acknowledge that just because men are more likely to be anti-abortion then women, that does not mean that men are more likely to be anti-abortion in general? Because I would argue the latter is irrelevant to the fact that the majority of people who are against abortion rights will never be directly affected by it.
Those 79% are irrelevant, what would be relevant is the opposite, which percentage of men are opposed to abortion, not how many of the people opposed to abortion are men.
Irrelevant to what? It’s fair to say she is clearly Pro-Choice, so understanding the demographics of those who are anti-choice is very relevant. Especially if your point is that “since 4 out of 5 people opposed to abortion rights are men, who will not be directly affected by these laws, their opinion is functionally irrelevant”.
Or are you just upset that this fails to acknowledge that just because men are more likely to be anti-abortion then women, that does not mean that men are more likely to be anti-abortion in general? Because I would argue the latter is irrelevant to the fact that the majority of people who are against abortion rights will never be directly affected by it.