There is something almost fascinating about the confidence of a mediocre double standard. We see it in politics, in religion, shoot, day-to-day living. And sadly, we see it in a lot of Black men.
Enter Cam Newton.
The former NFL quarterback, and father of nine children by multiple women, recently declared on a podcast that a woman’s “value gets lower the more children that they have.”
Let that marinate.
A man with nine children. A man whose own romantic résumé reads like a family reunion program. A man who has benefited from women carrying, birthing, and raising his legacy. And yet, he has positioned himself as the appraiser of women’s worth.
That, my friends, is the audacity of chauvinism.
Let’s be clear about something. This isn’t about Cam Newton, the athlete (who I happened to like). This isn’t about the Carolina Panthers or his stats on the field. This is about the tired, recycled notion that a woman’s value is tied to her “purity,” her womb, or her proximity to male approval.
It’s 2026, and we are still having conversations about women being reduced to inventory.
What makes Newton’s comments even more remarkable is that in the same breath, he says men should accept a woman’s children if they choose to be with her. He even advised one of the mothers of his children that if a man won’t love her five children, “that ain’t the guy for you.”
Sir.
So women’s value decreases with each child, but men are noble for loving the children they helped create? That’s not logic. That’s ego.
This is the kind of thinking that Black women, in particular, have been battling for generations. The Jezebel stereotype. The “baby mama” caricature. The quiet shaming wrapped in church whispers and Twitter threads. The idea that motherhood somehow makes us less desirable – unless, of course, we are raising the next NFL draft pick.
The hypocrisy is exhausting. Men are often applauded for virility. Women are penalized for fertility. A man with multiple children is seen as powerful, prolific, even desirable. A woman with multiple children is viewed as irresponsible, “used,” or somehow diminished. I mean, gospel singer KeKe Wyatt is crucified for having eleven kids WITH HER HUSBAND, but men like Cam get an “Atta Boy.”
Who created that math? And why are we still pretending it makes sense?
What’s dangerous about statements like Newton’s isn’t just that they’re offensive. It’s that they normalize the grading of women’s humanity. They subtly reinforce the idea that a woman’s worth is transactional, that she depreciates like a car with every milestone of lived experience.
That ideology doesn’t just live on podcasts. It shows up in hiring bias. In dating culture. In how society treats single mothers. In how often Black women are told to be grateful for being “chosen.”
And here’s the part that needs to be said plainly: Motherhood is not a liability.
It is leadership. It is management. It is sacrifice. It is strength.
Black women have built families, communities, and movements while being told they were too much, too loud, too independent, and now apparently, too maternal.
The audacity isn’t just that Cam Newton said it. The audacity is that some people nodded along.
We have to stop entertaining the notion that women’s value is negotiable. It fluctuates based on how many times we have loved, carried life, survived heartbreak, or rebuilt.
A woman’s worth is not determined by how many children she has. It is not determined by whether a man finds her convenient. It is not determined by whether she fits into someone’s narrow blueprint of desirability.
And if a man with nine children thinks he’s qualified to set the scale? That tells you everything you need to know about the scale.
The real conversation we should be having is about accountability and how casually misogyny still flows in public spaces, and how often Black women are expected to absorb it quietly.
Not today. If a woman chooses to have one child or five, with one partner or none, her value remains intact. Period. Because the audacity of chauvinism only survives when we let it.
And we’re done doing that.
