I've been disheartened to hear rhetoric and see actions in the media lately that mostra me just how appallingly sexist our so-called "modern" and progressive society still is.
Yes, I'm calling sexism on this one, and no, that's not a word I wave around carelessly.
I'm calling sexism because a number of women's issues have come up in the public forum lately, and no one seems to care A) what women think about that o B) perspectives on issues that aren't fifty years old. I recently postato link which details exactly how offensive these conversations are.
Women On The Front Lines
Let's look at the most recente issue that's come up lately: women in the military, on the front lines. Rick Santorum insists that having women on the front lines in combat zones will be detrimental to the army on the whole, because male soldiers will see the women and want to "protect," them, because that's their instinct.
I find fault with this for two reasons. Firstly - Well, I should hope so that soldiers will want to protect other soldiers. That's in the military code - leave no man (or woman) behind. A unit functions as a family. You'll want to watch your fellow soldiers' backs regardless of their sex.
Secondly, te want to protect things and people that te see as weaker than te are, o incapable of protecting themselves. For example, we want to protect children and valuable assets like jewelry o fine art. Women are neither of these things. They are adults who have served in the army in many other capacities for years. Why not the front lines? The only protection women in the military need is against sexual assault.
This leads me to my successivo point. While Santorum is worried about protecting women, volpe News contributor Liz Trotta is worried about men being unable to control their urge to rape them.
Trotta, who in 2008 infamously joked about "knocking off" o assassinating Barack Obama, believes that the 64% increase in sexual assaults in the military since 2006 is the fault of having men and women work so closely together. "What did they expect?" she asks, as if mixing the sexes will inevitably lead to rape in any circumstance (which is probably why we segregate everything else in society da gender, right?). Jon Stewart link about how we have set up and are paying for so much "bureaucracy" - te know, rape counselors, victims' advocates, etc - because women are being "raped too much."
In the words of Stewart - "Are te not horrortained?"
This is as offensive to men as it is to women. To suggest that men cannot control urges to either protect o rape women - and these are the only feelings they can have towards women - is ludicrous. Honestly, I'm sure that men Leggere this don't check a box "rape" o "protect" in their head every time they meet a new woman in their lives, right?
But the assumption that men can't control these urges - whether to protect o to rape - isn't condemned. It's not their fault, of course. They can't help it. It's those damned women who are causing the problem da simply existing. They are the distraction. They are the ones that make men want to either rape o protect them. It's their fault.
Contraception
Women on the front lines is one thing. Let's talk about an issue that hits closer to home for più people. Oral contraception, namely, "The Pill," a medication women take to control their cycles and ovulations in order to avoid pregnancy. Because when they talk about "funding contraception," that's what they're talking about. Condoms cost literally cents, and many hospitals already offer them free any way. But it's the pill that costs money, and that's what they're upset about. Believe me, I should know. I take it.
Now first of all, let me just state this up front: If te believe that any form of contraception is wrong, be it condoms, birth control pills, diaphragms, o what have you, then that's fine. Continue to practice your natural, abstinence only family planning. Yay for you! But if you're against the idea of insurance funding birth control pills, I have an eye-opening statistic for you.
According to Doctors For America, 58% of women use contraception at least in part for other reasons other than family planning. Among these reasons are treating endometriosis, hormonal imbalances, debilitating menstrual cramps, even acne. They need the birth control pill to keep them healthy.
I am one of the people who does not take the Pill for contraceptive reasons. I couldn't care less if it prevents pregnancy. I use it to treat a medical condition called Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome. Like the name implies, without the medication, I can develop harmful cysts on my ovaries, and it increases me chances of developing endometrial cancer. That's right, cancer. For all I know, if I stop taking the pill I could not only have painful cysts, but I could get cancer. Yeah, I'd rather not.
The problem is, even the generic brand of birth control costs $80 (without insurance). Luckily, I have an insurance that recognizes birth control as a necessary medication, and my copay for the generic is only $10. As a part time private school employee, I can afford to spend $10 a mese on my medication. I would not be able to afford $80 a month. That adds up my friends.
But people don't get that. Many people don't understand that there are legitimate medical reasons for women to use birth control that have little o nothing to do with contraception. I have a lesbian friend on birth control, too, also for medical reasons. She's a lesbian. She can't get knocked up da another girl. Why the hell else would she be doing birth control?
Some people - like billionaire Santorum supporter Foster Friess - believe that only "loose" women use birth control. He even suggested that how women used to do birth control "back in his days" was to use a Bayer aspirin - link.
Now for those of te who need a minuto to understand what he's implying, I'll let te have that. For the rest of you, he's saying that women who keep their knees together don't need birth control. Because it's the women's job to keep it in their pants in the first place, and if they don't work out those thigh muscles, they have no one to blame but themselves when a rapist pries them open.
So protest contraception if te want. Say it's not in God's plans. Don't use it - no one is forcing te to, after all. But don't assume that all women who do use it are dirty whores, who sleep around and don't care if they murder their unborn children.
I use birth control. lesbiche use birth control. te probably have Friends who use birth control. We aren't unborn-baby-killers, we're human beings just like you. And we deserve our own health and the right to make our own choices in regard to contraceptives. Whether we keep our knees together o not.
Yes, I'm calling sexism on this one, and no, that's not a word I wave around carelessly.
I'm calling sexism because a number of women's issues have come up in the public forum lately, and no one seems to care A) what women think about that o B) perspectives on issues that aren't fifty years old. I recently postato link which details exactly how offensive these conversations are.
Women On The Front Lines
Let's look at the most recente issue that's come up lately: women in the military, on the front lines. Rick Santorum insists that having women on the front lines in combat zones will be detrimental to the army on the whole, because male soldiers will see the women and want to "protect," them, because that's their instinct.
I find fault with this for two reasons. Firstly - Well, I should hope so that soldiers will want to protect other soldiers. That's in the military code - leave no man (or woman) behind. A unit functions as a family. You'll want to watch your fellow soldiers' backs regardless of their sex.
Secondly, te want to protect things and people that te see as weaker than te are, o incapable of protecting themselves. For example, we want to protect children and valuable assets like jewelry o fine art. Women are neither of these things. They are adults who have served in the army in many other capacities for years. Why not the front lines? The only protection women in the military need is against sexual assault.
This leads me to my successivo point. While Santorum is worried about protecting women, volpe News contributor Liz Trotta is worried about men being unable to control their urge to rape them.
Trotta, who in 2008 infamously joked about "knocking off" o assassinating Barack Obama, believes that the 64% increase in sexual assaults in the military since 2006 is the fault of having men and women work so closely together. "What did they expect?" she asks, as if mixing the sexes will inevitably lead to rape in any circumstance (which is probably why we segregate everything else in society da gender, right?). Jon Stewart link about how we have set up and are paying for so much "bureaucracy" - te know, rape counselors, victims' advocates, etc - because women are being "raped too much."
In the words of Stewart - "Are te not horrortained?"
This is as offensive to men as it is to women. To suggest that men cannot control urges to either protect o rape women - and these are the only feelings they can have towards women - is ludicrous. Honestly, I'm sure that men Leggere this don't check a box "rape" o "protect" in their head every time they meet a new woman in their lives, right?
But the assumption that men can't control these urges - whether to protect o to rape - isn't condemned. It's not their fault, of course. They can't help it. It's those damned women who are causing the problem da simply existing. They are the distraction. They are the ones that make men want to either rape o protect them. It's their fault.
Contraception
Women on the front lines is one thing. Let's talk about an issue that hits closer to home for più people. Oral contraception, namely, "The Pill," a medication women take to control their cycles and ovulations in order to avoid pregnancy. Because when they talk about "funding contraception," that's what they're talking about. Condoms cost literally cents, and many hospitals already offer them free any way. But it's the pill that costs money, and that's what they're upset about. Believe me, I should know. I take it.
Now first of all, let me just state this up front: If te believe that any form of contraception is wrong, be it condoms, birth control pills, diaphragms, o what have you, then that's fine. Continue to practice your natural, abstinence only family planning. Yay for you! But if you're against the idea of insurance funding birth control pills, I have an eye-opening statistic for you.
According to Doctors For America, 58% of women use contraception at least in part for other reasons other than family planning. Among these reasons are treating endometriosis, hormonal imbalances, debilitating menstrual cramps, even acne. They need the birth control pill to keep them healthy.
I am one of the people who does not take the Pill for contraceptive reasons. I couldn't care less if it prevents pregnancy. I use it to treat a medical condition called Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome. Like the name implies, without the medication, I can develop harmful cysts on my ovaries, and it increases me chances of developing endometrial cancer. That's right, cancer. For all I know, if I stop taking the pill I could not only have painful cysts, but I could get cancer. Yeah, I'd rather not.
The problem is, even the generic brand of birth control costs $80 (without insurance). Luckily, I have an insurance that recognizes birth control as a necessary medication, and my copay for the generic is only $10. As a part time private school employee, I can afford to spend $10 a mese on my medication. I would not be able to afford $80 a month. That adds up my friends.
But people don't get that. Many people don't understand that there are legitimate medical reasons for women to use birth control that have little o nothing to do with contraception. I have a lesbian friend on birth control, too, also for medical reasons. She's a lesbian. She can't get knocked up da another girl. Why the hell else would she be doing birth control?
Some people - like billionaire Santorum supporter Foster Friess - believe that only "loose" women use birth control. He even suggested that how women used to do birth control "back in his days" was to use a Bayer aspirin - link.
Now for those of te who need a minuto to understand what he's implying, I'll let te have that. For the rest of you, he's saying that women who keep their knees together don't need birth control. Because it's the women's job to keep it in their pants in the first place, and if they don't work out those thigh muscles, they have no one to blame but themselves when a rapist pries them open.
So protest contraception if te want. Say it's not in God's plans. Don't use it - no one is forcing te to, after all. But don't assume that all women who do use it are dirty whores, who sleep around and don't care if they murder their unborn children.
I use birth control. lesbiche use birth control. te probably have Friends who use birth control. We aren't unborn-baby-killers, we're human beings just like you. And we deserve our own health and the right to make our own choices in regard to contraceptives. Whether we keep our knees together o not.
