Sunday, March 19, 2006

The war on sex

One reason I get so angry at the pro-life movement is that it seems more about anti-sex - geared specifically at women. The best evidence I can show you of this--- comments from one of the proponents of the abortion ban in South Dakota. According to him, it may be okay for a woman to get an abortion in the case of rape, provided she meets some "standards."

Senator Napoli of Rapid City: "A real-life description to me would be a rape victim, brutally raped, savaged. The girl was a virgin. She was religious. She planned on saving her virginity until she was married. She was brutalized and raped, sodomized as bad as you can possibly make it, and is impregnated. I mean, that girl could be so messed up, physically and psychologically, that carrying that child could very well threaten her life."

So the only real rape is when the girl is "religious" and "virginal." Lovely.

But now the issue isn't just about abortion, it's about having the right to choose our reproductive destiny as women.

I have never understood why the pro-life movement and us pro-choicers could never find common ground... I mean, if we both want to prevent abortions, let's work together. But the anti-choice people want to do more than stop abortion.

Recently I posted about my insurance company and how it would not cover contraception. I have received several comments from people who are angry at women - like myself - who expect this type of coverage. They tell me I should "stop whining.""Giving birth is a miracle. be happy you're a woman" and "it's not sexist because men don't get spermicidal birth control covered."

Most recently I got this comment:

Drugs perscibed to men for birth control (spermicides) are also not covered by most insurance companies. The idea behind this is that you're putting drugs into your body that you could live without.Your blog is very public, and your argument concerning sexism is being ridiculed by more than just me.

Okay, let me explain why this argument is insane!

There is a big difference in birth control for men and birth control for women.

First of all, nothing physically happens to a man if he impregnates a woman. If a woman gets pregnant, her entire physical condition is compromised. Not just for nine months of her life but for months following. There are also extreme health risks involved in pregnancy.

Pregnancy for a womean also means interfering with whatever plans she has. For example: If a married woman is pursuing a difficult career – let’s say - making partner at a law firm, birth control would be essential for her and her partner. Otherwise she could lose career opportunities during maternity leave and in sick time during pregnancy—not to mention doctor visits.

AGAIN: Pregnancy does not effect a man’s health or interfere with his job.

For tens of thousands of women suffering from heart or kidney disease, severe hypertension, sickle-cell anemia and severe diabetes, as well as other illnesses, the availability of contraception is essential to protecting them and ensuring they can continue having healthy, safe sexual relationships without risking their lives.

AGAIN: A man does not have to fear death as a result of having sex and becoming pregnant.

That’s not to say I don’t think men should have their family planning medications covered. I will say it again—insurance companies would save thousands if they put money into family planning--- but as you can see, it’s quite a bit more essential for women. Not only that, birth control pills or patches are WAY more effective than spermicide.
From plannedparenthood.com

Of every 100 women who use the pill, eight will become pregnant during the first year of typical use. Fewer than one will become pregnant with perfect use.

FEWER THAN ONE!

In the case of spermicidal products…
Of 100 women who use it, 29 will become pregnant during the first year of typical use. Fifteen will become pregnant with perfect use.

Therefore these products are not comparable in efficiency. And the price comparison is also self-explanatory…

The pill: $35–$125. The cost depends on your income at some family planning clinics. Whereas spermicidal cream kits are about $8.

So please don’t come on my blog and tell me it’s “public” – I know that. I mean for Lord’s sake, I opened a website! I’m aware. You, however are most certainly NOT aware.

Many women cannot “live without” these drugs. And if you paid attention you’d know that. People who don’t believe in contraceptive coverage – YOU are the minority. The majority of Americans, support a women’s right to affordable access to birth control.
If you watched the news, you would know this.

“Two female plaintiffs, one from Missouri and another from Idaho, won an important victory late Friday when the U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska ruled that Union Pacific’s decision to exclude prescription contraception coverage in its health plans for unionized employees is sex discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964.”

And that was Union Pacific, a Fortune 500 company and the largest railroad in North America!! More than 48,000 employees located throughout the nation will benefit from this new ruling.

So where does that leave your argument?

FOR MORE INFO: http://www.covermypills.org/

19 comments:

Anonymous said...

I stumbled upon your site in my late night surfing and couldn't help but to notice your writings. I find it safe to assume that you support the idea of equal political, economic, and social rights for women, termed a feminist if you will, and I have no problem with that. I do however have a problem with the abusive attutide you show towards the male gender in general. While it may be true that women in American society do not have all of the benefits that men have, it is most certainly true that women within this society exhibit far more freedoms than that of most other countries. But I suppose you shouldn't be content until you are equal. I found your writings to be interesting until I read the comment you posted and your answer to it. Whoever posted that was seemingly just trying to inform you that said insurance practices were not as sexist as you may think. A fairly simple, and polite, attempt to bring to your attention some information you may or may not have known. Then you blasted it and called it an insane arguement. That shows true character. I'm assuming that since it didn't follow your opinons and beliefs, it must be crap. How long did it take you to research all of that information for your counter-point? It was nice to see all of that for a three sentence comment. Cute. I expect no less than a fifteen sentence rant, but feel free to add more, from you filled to the brim with wonderful information you may think I don't know and plenty of research from Findlaw.com. By the way, it's not the opposite sex's fault that your a raging feminist because daddy didn't hug you enough. I expect your bitter retort to this comment to be humorous at best.

Anonymous said...

one girl to another, let me offer some advice so you can shut the fuck up and stop giving everyone in our sex a bad name.

Make your boyfriend take a fucking spermacide and wear a condom. That way, you're 99.9% safe AND your dumb ass can be covered by your insurance company. Pretty damn complicated, right?

By the way, I feel like I should inform you that your lame rantings are being highlighted on Collegehumor.com and that you're getting slandered to all hell.

Anonymous said...

HAHAA! What a bitch!

-rHEN

Tobes said...

Wow. You've all cut me so deep. I'm a "bitchy, raging feminist," "daddy didn't hug me enough," "I must hate men." Wow. I feel like you all know me so well. Can we get together and hang out?

Glad to know I'm gaining some notoriety. Someone should really send me the link to collegehumor. Is that how I know I've hit it big?

I call an argument insane because I don't see any logic in it- as I point out in my post. It's not me saying these people aren't worthwhile or they should "shut the fuck up." But I am loud about my opinions. No doubt about that. If it offends you, I'm sorry. Please direct yourself to a more like-minded atmosphere.

My concern about women's access to contraception has nothing to do with my personal sex life or lack thereof and everything to do with the safety of families everywhere.

Contraception is not a sex/whore/bad person issue- -it's a health issue. We are lucky to live in a society where people can make choices about the number and spacing of their children. Both men and women have benefited from this.

As I have said in this blog entry and in past ones, I don't think it would be a bad idea for insurance companies to cover all forms of family planning and S.T.I. prevention as it is much cheaper than paying pregnancy cost or the cost of HIV drugs or herpes treatments. This includes male and female forms of contraception. So clearly this is not man-hating.

Trying to shame me by saying I'm a raging feminist isn't going to work. I'm a proud feminist and I stand by my opinion that denying women access to contraception amounts to sexism. And I'm not alone in this idea --- see the court case against Union Pacific. Apparently a judge agrees with me.

At times, I should take a deep breath. It's not nice to call an argument insane-- even if, to me, it seems completely illogical. So I do apologize, "insane" is a loaded word at best and I don't need to stoop to insults to get my point across. Forgive me, it was in an impassioned moment of typing.

You cannot frighten me by calling me a feminist, an idiot, a bitch or a whore. I have enough people in my life that tell me otherwise and enough common sense to know that you might just be upset because the stuff I'm saying rings true. Or maybe you're upset that someone was pointing out something logical.

I wish you all the best and please keep enjoying my blog. Although I should warn you that sometimes I blog about other random events like movies, books etc. You might not have anything to comment on then. Unless you find my taste in EVERYTHING offensive?

Have a great day. Thanks for stopping by.

Tyler M Tupa said...

You know, it's easy to post such strong words as "Anonymous". This woman is putting her thoughts out there for all to read. You don't have to like them, you don't have to read them. Posting snide replies as "Anonymous" is just like punching someone in the back of the head.

Anonymous said...

You are angry at the world (Raging)because you were born a women, and you feel that you should get equal rights like everyone else (Feminism). Raging Feminism. I don't think that the other anon. posters were trying to "shame" or "frighten" you, but simply let you know where you stand in the online community. If you have so many friends that tell you that your other that what was posted above, why the hell do you need a blog? You're polluting the internet.


P.S. Tell that lesbian Tupa that punching someone in the back of the head is like punching someone in the back of the head. Making snide comments about people under total anonymity is what the internet is all about. No fear of threat or repercussion. If he doesn't understand that, maybe he should continue to sit at the kiddy table and be quiet.

Tobes said...

Ooh. I think I get it now. When we really want to insult someone, we call them a "lesbian." How original. Now I know I'm not a man-hater, but are you sure you're not a woman-hater?

Besides. At least he had the guts to post his name with a post. What are you risking, seriously? It's really easy for you to go on here and call people a feminist like it's a bad thing. I am not angry at being born a woman. Not at all, I’m angry I have to share my world with spineless people such as yourself. But don’t flatter yourself that you’re getting to me. It’s kind of fun to read opposing views where the best you can do is try to defend your cowardice and call someone a lesbian.

"I only know that people call me a feminist whenever I express sentiments that differentiate me from a doormat or a prostitute."
-Rebecca West.

I have to ask that you restrict your personal attacks on me or I will be forced to start deleting your posts. And then what will you folks have to live for? If you can't come on here and yell at the big bad raging feminist?

Anonymous said...

I will agree that personal attacks on blogs are not the correct way to argue a point or get a view across. That is a crude way to deliver a message. However, to play devil's advocate here, censoring such comments by deleting them should not be a course of action. By deleting someone's thoughts, no matter how hateful, you have stooped to their level. Let them post, beat them with wit and sophistication. By deleting their posts they will think they have one because you cannot directly deal with them. Don't do it.

This should be said of all internet forums and blogs.

Jerry Hoskins said...

Why don't you anonymous jerkoffs stop poisoning the internet and shut the hell up? Keep fighting tobes, I'm with you

Anonymous said...

I think that when men can engage in the same no-fault parenthood that women currently abuse, then women should be able to have all the abortions they want.

Tobes said...

Thank you to the last two posters.

I appreciate it. And I agree- I am against censorship on my blog. I will only delete a post if the poster attacks someone by name.

You could argue that I should delete Jerry's post because he calls people "anonymous jerkoffs" but since the anonymous don't have the guts to post their name, I see no reason show them same courtesy.

However if someone does comment on my blog and is brave enough to use their name and THEN someone else ridicules them, I will delete that post.

No one should be afraid to comment on my blog. I put some big thoughts out there and I hope to generate discussion. But I do draw the line at harassment.

A special thanks to Jerry. You made me smile :)

Tobes said...

Whoa. A girl just can't get a word in. I was reffering to the poster who said I should not censor and also Jerry. The more recent anonymous post- not so much.

Walger200 said...

This wouldn't be nearly as irritating if you didn't seem like such a cunty bitch.

No digg.

Seumas said...

"equal rights for women. Particularly in the area of reproductive rights. "

Let's dispense with the bullshit smoke and mirrors here and tell the truth.

The statement quoted doesn't even mean anything. How do you have "equal rights" for something that only women have or can do? I'm PRO-CHOICE (though not "pro" abortion) but a woman decides to get pregnant. A woman decides to use or not use protection. A woman decides to have or not go through with the birth. A woman decides to put a child up for adoption or not. A woman decides whether or not the go after the male (who may have been part of it or also could have been the victim of "I can't get pregnant" / "I'm on the bill, honest!" deception). A woman can even decide to pick a man and convince the state that he is the father and make him obligated to care for the child for the rest of his life, even if it IS NOT his kid (and the courts have upheld this in some cases!).

While there are a few backwards states forgetting the whole autonomous-self / right to your own decisions thing, by and large everything about getting pregnant and having or not having or raising or not raising children from start to finish is ENTIRELY up to the mother.

There HAVE been plenty of cases of women who have tricked men into getting them pregnant OR who have accidentally become pregnant and then suckered some poor guy into believing it was his. Women have ALL of the equality and them some. When female and children come into the mix, they have whatever male they want literally by the testicles.

So don't sit here and give me this bullshit "women don't have equal reproductive rights" bullshit. When a man convinces a woman that he is on birth control and can't get pregnant anyway and doesn't want children, but then tricks the woman into becoming pregnant and then forces her to have the child and then forces her to pay for the child that HE decided to have for the next 21 years THEN we can talk about "equality".

Anyway, who the hell is this chick and why should I care? She sounds like every bean-sprout eating, sandal-wearing, college chick I've ever known.

Anonymous said...

I think something to consider in the quest for insurance covered birth control is that it would cost them money to do that. It is pretty simple really, if the company or person purchasing your insurance wanted to pay for your birth control I suspect all they would have to do is make a call and write a check. I think your beef is with the people who buy your insurance. Along the same line would be some thought as to where the money is coming from, as in your pocket. Benefits cost money and you can think of them as money you are spending that doesn't get taxed. What a deal. Whoever that is buying your insurance has a limited amount of money and some goes to wages and some to benefits and elswhere, if your insurance has to pay more out it costs more which means....wait for it...you get paid less.
In reading your blog trying to find your original post on insurance I noticed that you get upset when laws are not passed requiring people to buy things for you. You seem to want stuff for free and other people should pay for it. I would suggest just buy what you want with your money (it really is going to come out of your pocket anyway). If you don't have enough money to buy what you want then get a job that does earn you enough or re-evaluate your expectations.

I would suggest to you that if you can prove statistically that providing birth control reduces overall health costs then insurance companies would provide it and charge more if the purchaser says they will not allow it to be provided. Insurance companies are funny in that way. Just like young peoples car insurance costs more because they have more claims. It really is all about the money and not really at all about keeping women down.

Adrienne said...

If you're looking for a man-hating raging feminist, come on over to my blog. Tobes is absolutely reasonable, and anyone who has been seventeen and pregnant (and guess what? we used a condom and spermicide) will tell you so.

Clearly I don't understand how you could disagree with anything written in this entry, whether or not you are pro-choice. Birth control saves lives everyday.

If y'all were really so concerned, you'd be thinking about ways to prevent unhealthy sexual encounters from happening, ie self control or self-esteem classes, instead of just trying to bury the issue in shame and lock it all away.

There is nothing in Tobes post that makes me think that she has an abusive outlook on the male gender. I think that you, anonymous #1, is lumping the issue in a sad attempt to stir a pot that doesn't need to be stirred.

And no one with a brain reads collegehumor.com. So there.

Tyler M Tupa said...

It's funny because if it was just about money, there wouldn't be much argument. But A LOT of the time all you have to do is ask around to find your answer. Pharmacists, insurance agents, ABORTION CLINICS..."it's against our moral beliefs"!!!

If you believe in doing your job, you have to be pissed when people refuse to do theirs because it's against their beliefs.

You know what, if it's against your beliefs....FIND A NEW JOB!

A lot of times the law says they have that right. However, when the law says a woman can get an abortion, but the abortion clinic says they don't believe in them...where does that leave the woman??

Basically, you say a woman can make all of these decisions, but in reality, much of the time women are left with none. If a woman is RAPED and a child is the result, no one would want to carry that reminder for 9 months. I am very "pro-life" in that I believe a baby is created at conception. However, in cases where the mother was raped or abused I understand and support their right to an abortion.

It's just not right that some people can make a woman carry a baby so they do not have to go against their morals.

Sam Falke said...

Wow, it's rare to find so many outspoken, opinionated people in one place. You people need to find better things to do with your time. All this crap about women's rights, or against women's rights is a waste. The world will never be fair, deal with it. There will always be injustice. It's sad that all of you focus on one topic so ferociously. Especially this crap. I don't care what you think of what I'm about to say, but there are far more important things in this nation to focus on then this. What about generational poverty or the problem of homelessness in the U.S. tobes? Why don't you start writing about that? I'll tell you why, it's because you don't think it's as important as your cause. Just ditch the blog and join a web group. Spare us your rants. Now, from reading the previous posts, I will assume that you and your little blogger buddies will no doubt not let this comment go unnoticed. I don't give a shit if you flame this. Nobody outside of your little group does. But go ahead anyway, it would be uncharacteristic not to.

Adrienne said...

sam: the beautiful thing about blogs is that if it offends you, you don't have to read it. Tobes doesn't have to spare us of any of her 'rants' because she's not forcing you to listen to it. Now begone, choice haters, before a house drops on you.

and to the man who said that it isn't equal because a woman could 'trick' a man into having sex-- dude. If you have sex you are accepting a reasonable amount of risk. NO BIRTH CONTROL, other than abstinence, is 100%.