The Bonfire of Women’s Futures
The Trump administration incinerated nearly $10 million in contraceptives meant for low-income women abroad, proving once again that ideology trumps human lives.
Setting the Stage
The facts are as stark as they are cruel: at the direction of Trump officials, nearly $10 million worth of contraceptives—birth control pills, IUDs, and hormonal implants—were destroyed in Belgium. These supplies, purchased by USAID for distribution in low-income countries, were offered a second life by groups like the Gates Foundation and the UN Population Fund. Instead, the administration paid $167,000 to burn them.
The justification? A false claim that these contraceptives were “abortifacients,” despite repeated internal memos clarifying that none of the products induced abortion. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Russell Vought of the Office of Management and Budget, and Jeremy Lewin at the State Department drove the decision. Officials had cheaper, lifesaving options on the table. They chose incineration.
Belgian authorities, alarmed by the waste and aware of the lifesaving potential of these supplies, tried to intervene. But the Trump administration pressed forward, demonstrating a preference for ideological purity over practical compassion.
This moment sits within a broader pattern: dismantling USAID, gutting global health initiatives, and using “pro-life” rhetoric as cover for policies that increase suffering and death.
The Power at Play
This is about more than contraceptives in a warehouse. It is about who gets to define what counts as basic medicine. By treating birth control as optional — or worse, as dangerous — the Trump administration effectively demoted women’s health to second-class status. Contraceptives are not luxuries; they are part of the baseline of modern healthcare. Declaring them expendable is another way of saying that women’s agency is expendable.
When access to contraception is stripped away, women lose the ability to determine the course of their own lives. They are more likely to be sidelined by unplanned pregnancies, denied educational opportunities, and pushed into cycles of poverty. In practice, this is a denial of economic equity between women and men — a refusal to allow half the population the same chance to shape their futures.
There is also a geopolitical dimension. USAID has long been one of the most visible arms of American soft power, shaping global goodwill. By torching contraceptives, Trump effectively sent a message: U.S. foreign policy will sacrifice women’s autonomy to appease a shrinking but militant Christian nationalist base.
The economic waste is staggering. Taxpayer-funded products could have been sold or donated, saving millions of lives while recouping costs. Instead, the administration spent more to destroy them. That choice echoes what the Scottish Greens call performative cruelty—a politics where waste and inefficiency are embraced as long as they signal loyalty to ideology .
This is a deliberate narrowing of America’s global role, transforming aid into an instrument of ideological warfare.
A Lens of Justice
The victims here are overwhelmingly women in low-income nations—many of them Black and brown—whose reproductive autonomy is already constrained by poverty and patriarchy. Contraceptives are not luxuries; they are medicine. They belong in the same category as antibiotics, vaccines, or insulin: life-altering tools that allow people to survive and thrive.
And this goes deeper than individual rights. Reproductive freedom is one of the most powerful engines of economic mobility. Every dollar invested in family planning has been shown to yield multiple dollars in economic growth. When women can plan and space their pregnancies, they are more likely to finish school, secure employment, and lift their families out of poverty. Entire communities benefit: healthier children, stronger local economies, and more stable societies.
Destroying these supplies is not neutral. It is a gendered act of domination that reinforces white, Western, Christian hierarchies. The Scottish National Party has long warned that austerity and social conservatism disproportionately hurt women and the poor . This policy embodies that reality on a global scale.
We should be clear: the Trump administration is not merely indifferent to women’s health. It weaponizes that indifference, treating women’s bodies as expendable in pursuit of political theater.
Reframing the Debate
Conservatives want the conversation framed around “protecting unborn children.” But this was not about abortion. It was about whether birth control itself qualifies as basic medicine — and whether women deserve the same access to healthcare and economic equity as men.
Progressives must emphasize that reproductive freedom is not just healthcare, it is infrastructure for prosperity. Communities with access to contraception see higher rates of educational attainment, lower rates of maternal mortality, and greater stability. Cutting off access is not a defense of life—it is a guarantee of poverty and death.
The debate is not whether aid should include contraception. It is whether aid should be governed by science and compassion or by religious zealotry.
Building the Conversation
When discussing this with skeptics, appeal to shared values:
Logical appeal: Point out the fiscal waste. Destroying $9.7 million of product plus $167,000 in destruction costs is indefensible when groups were willing to buy or accept them for free.
Emotional appeal: Humanize the stakes. Each contraceptive burned could have been a woman spared from an unsafe abortion or a child born into poverty.
Ethical appeal: Frame contraception as medicine. Ask: would we ever burn millions in cancer drugs because of ideological discomfort?
Tell stories. A woman in rural Malawi who walks hours to reach a clinic, only to find there is no contraceptive supply, does not care about American political theater. She cares about surviving childbirth, feeding her children, and securing a better life for her family.
The Counterpoint Trap
Let’s anticipate the bad-faith arguments:
“President Trump is protecting unborn children.” → Projection
This reframes contraception as abortion, which is medically false. The real intent is to project cruelty as compassion.
Takeaway: Emphasize that contraception is medicine that prevents abortions, making this policy self-contradictory.
“It’s about fiscal responsibility—no eligible buyers.” → Gaslighting
Internal memos showed seven organizations willing to take them at no cost. Claiming no buyers existed is denial of reality.
Takeaway: Point to the record: destruction cost more than donation or sale.
Deeper Dive
For readers who want to go further:
Dorothy Roberts, Killing the Black Body – A powerful exploration of how reproductive rights are tied to race, class, and power.
Michelle Goldberg, The Means of Reproduction – A global look at how reproductive politics shape women’s lives.
Nancy MacLean, Democracy in Chains – Helps connect the dots between reactionary ideology and policy assaults on democracy and equality.
The Last Laugh
While they posture as fiscal conservatives, they’re literally burning taxpayer money to deny women the tools to control their futures. It’s the only kind of family planning they’ve ever really believed in—planned misery.