Do any of you watch Project Runway? I've been obsessed with the show since Season 3 and I am currently riveted by Project Runway All Stars, which will be ending next Thursday (3/22)! This season is the best because my favorite designer, Mondo Guerra, made it through to the finale!
Mondo is an amazing designer, because he does some REALLY interesting things with patterns and shapes. His clothes are incredibly vibrant, and unique, and exciting... they're artistic but at the same time he often makes things that regular people could wear and look cute in!
I love Mondo even more though, because he is an outspoken activist for HIV Awareness. In Season Eight of Project Runway he came out to the judges (and the country) as HIV positive, bringing almost everyone to tears as he shared his personal story...
Since then he has put himself out there as a public speaker on the issue, even appearing on Anderson Cooper's show to raise awareness and reduce stigma...
It takes a ton of bravery to admit to being HIV+ on National TV (especially because his coming out on television forced him to come out to his family as well). Mondo is awesome because he addresses the issue of HIV/AIDS, but he doesn't let the disease define him. He is living proof of the full and vibrant lives that people who are HIV+ can live as medical technology gets better and better at managing HIV.
On last night's episode Mondo made me love him even more as he spoke openly and honestly about the pressure of being in the finale, and how paralyzed he felt by it. It was painful for me to watch him struggle not to snap at the other designers as he sat in the workroom, trying to collect himself as Austin and Michael ran around him, hard at work on their collections.
This was painful for me because I recognized that feeling, that breakdown, perfectly - the paralyzing fear that comes with huge potential success (like being in the finale of Project Runway All Stars or, in my case, presenting at your first conference.) These kinds of breakdowns are the worst because they come with this overwhelming guilt about wasting such a brilliant opportunity with your anxiety; even worse, the anxiety takes things you love (like designing) and turn them into stressful, miserable, obligations... but the guilt keeps you from talking about it to anyone, lest you look ungrateful, and if you're not careful you wind up in this awfully dark and lonely place.
Not Mondo, though. Mondo let himself rest (something so important, that many of us forget to do) and then he pulled himself together and started designing a collection based around the idea of therapy. By doing this Mondo has taken another taboo (mental health/illness) and brought it out into the open, using his designs to start a conversation and help reduce the stigma of living with imperfections.
So basically, all that was to say I really hope Mondo wins because seriously he deserves it. What do my fellow Project Runway fans think?
Happy Spring Break! We'll be back with new content in a week.
Friday, March 16, 2012
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Happy National Condom Day!!!!!
A condom is a barrier method form of birth control, so unlike some other kinds of BC, it protects you from STIs as well as pregnancy! What a helpful item! Take this beautiful National Condom Day and, if you have them, thank your condoms for always being in your bedside drawer.
HOORAY FOR CONDOMS!
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Speaking Out on Twitter About Sexual Assault
*Trigger Warning*
For those of you who have a Twitter account, you may already know that there’s a new tag getting a lot of attention right now: #ididnotreport is a tag where women can talk about sexual violence they’ve experienced, either telling about the situation specifically or just explaining why they never spoke out. I want to be completely clear: there is a major trigger warning for sexual violence, but if you can, I suggest taking a look.
For those of you who have a Twitter account, you may already know that there’s a new tag getting a lot of attention right now: #ididnotreport is a tag where women can talk about sexual violence they’ve experienced, either telling about the situation specifically or just explaining why they never spoke out. I want to be completely clear: there is a major trigger warning for sexual violence, but if you can, I suggest taking a look.
In addition to tweets describing sexual assaults, there are also tweets signal boosting the tag and showing support to the women (and men!) who are using the tag as an outlet:
There are also plenty of responses like this one:
Aside from the actual tweets discussing violence, tweets like Bragg’s get to the heart of the issue – that sexual violence is one of the ways in which women are still oppressed every day. Tabby Kinder, a writer at the news site EastLondonLines, sums it up perfectly:
Like rape, street harassment restricts girls’ and women’s access to public places. Catcalls, sexist comments, public masturbation, groping and assault make public places unfriendly, frightening and dangerous for many girls, women, and LGBT people.
Street harassment and sexual assault are unacceptable, yet women suffer through it everyday, many just tolerating it because they think that it's just a part of life they have no choice but to deal with. In fact, we don't have to just take it - whether it's reporting it or speaking out, there are ways to fight back. There are even websites where women snap pictures of men who harass them publicly and post them for others to see, essentially calling them out.
Seeing the outpouring of stories on the Twitter tag is absolutely heartbreaking, but it's great that so many women have the opportunity to use the tag as something of a safe space in which to share their experiences. There has even been an account created for women afraid to share on their personal account. The world needs to understand how huge this problem is, and how deeply it affects women, and social media has created an opportunity to spread the word.
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Where is the Love?
I'll admit it..one of my guilty pleasures has to be The Bachelor on ABC. Basically, a group of 30 women live in a mansion together while they all date the same man and in the end, hope they find love. The reason why I love the show is because it is so ridiculously staged and unrealistic- I mean will you really ever go on 5 dates in one week each in a different country? That would be totally amazing however that would never happen to 99% of people. Watching this show puts an idea in viewers mind that every relationship has to be perfect and that basically love is a game where your happiness is determined with whether you receive a rose at the end of the episode.
Even though I am obsessed with this show I realize that no one falls in love this way. This got me thinking about other ways that people attempt to find that perfect someone: online dating. Sites such as EHarmony and Match.com have attracted 40 million people in the U.S. as of January of this year. With the average money being spent by these dating site members being around $239 a year, they are obviously invested in finding that special someone. I know many people that have gone on great dates by meeting someone through one of these sites, and it seemed to have worked out for them. It has also worked out for many others. Match.com reports that 1 in 5 relationships begin online and EHarmony says that they are responsible for nearly 5% of marriages in the U.S.
There is a reason that in the 24 seasons of The Bachelor and The Bachelorette, only one couple is still married and one engaged. Trying to build a relationship under the scrutiny of America is not the easiest, and that is the likely reason why these couples have not stayed together. Once they come back to the real world there are no extravagant dates on the top of a mountain or a picnics on a private island. After this is taken away, the relationship seems disappointing. But for those who work at a relationship and invest in finding their match by meeting new people either online or through friends, they can't go wrong.
Even though I am obsessed with this show I realize that no one falls in love this way. This got me thinking about other ways that people attempt to find that perfect someone: online dating. Sites such as EHarmony and Match.com have attracted 40 million people in the U.S. as of January of this year. With the average money being spent by these dating site members being around $239 a year, they are obviously invested in finding that special someone. I know many people that have gone on great dates by meeting someone through one of these sites, and it seemed to have worked out for them. It has also worked out for many others. Match.com reports that 1 in 5 relationships begin online and EHarmony says that they are responsible for nearly 5% of marriages in the U.S.
There is a reason that in the 24 seasons of The Bachelor and The Bachelorette, only one couple is still married and one engaged. Trying to build a relationship under the scrutiny of America is not the easiest, and that is the likely reason why these couples have not stayed together. Once they come back to the real world there are no extravagant dates on the top of a mountain or a picnics on a private island. After this is taken away, the relationship seems disappointing. But for those who work at a relationship and invest in finding their match by meeting new people either online or through friends, they can't go wrong.
Monday, March 12, 2012
Modern (& Ironic) Feminist Portrayal
Here are a few fun videos for feminists who can laugh at themselves (or other feminists)! Portlandia is a television series running on the Independent Film Channel, starring Fred Armisen (of Saturday Night Live), and Carrie Brownstein. Brownstein is currently the vocalist and guitarist of Wild Flag, and was a former member of Sleater Kinney, a band well-known for their feminist/left political stance. Perhaps a Postmodern representation, Portlandia employs an ironic parody-critique of various social groups, including feminists. Check it out!
Religion and Acceptance
This is a guest post by Kim Halloran.
My topic for this post is religion. I realize that this can be a sensitive subject for many, but until recently I could never understand why, now I understand perfectly. I am a freshman in college and I am trying to get involved with a religious organization on campus, which I never knew would be so difficult. The reason I find this group so trying is because they continually bring up subjects that I feel have no place in any sort of worship service.
Exhibit one, at a combined meeting with several other religious organizations from about a dozen or so other college campuses, approximately two hundred of us listened to testimonies of how God touched and transformed a few individual’s lives. One of these testimonies was told by a fellow college student who had identified as gay until he recently found God, but now he has repented of his sinful ways. At this point in the service, everyone felt so moved by the Spirit that they had to give this poor young man a standing ovation, showered with plenty of “Hallelujahs” and “Amens”. (I personally felt so distraught that I was close to tears.) But wait - it gets better; with a triumphant smile upon his face, this poor boy rejoiced over the fact that he now has a girlfriend and together they pray for each other. (I’ve never realized that the point of being in a romantic relationship was to have a prayer partner.)
After the service was over, one of leaders in our campus’s group asked me what I thought of the testimonies, because she had apparently seen how appalled I was. I simply told her that I had never heard anything like that before in church and I’ve been an active Christian for my entire life. I continued that I am affiliated with the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A) who recently allowed members of the queer community to be pastors. Additionally, over winter break I attended “Jesus Camp” in North Carolina (Bible belt USA), where one of our speakers identified as a lesbian, and the overall consensus of the hundreds of conference attendees, also college students, was that we were so happy that she was able to share that with us. And sometimes the Bible is not always meant to be taken literally, because some of the references apply directly to the time period in which it was written. Her response to me was that although some passages in the Bible are not meant to be taken literally, these ones are, because being homosexual is referenced as a sin several times throughout the Bible.
I later researched, how often the Bible actually states that homosexuality is a sin. Although I was surprised the New Testament had a couple verses, the issue is only mentioned a handful of times throughout the entire Bible. It’s not like it’s referenced as many times as God’s infinite forgiveness and love. Besides one of the verses, Leviticus 18:22, “You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman; it is a detestable act.” First of all, this is only addressing same-sexual relations between males and is only addressing a male audience in general. Does that mean that because there several references stating the inferiority of women, that women are truly inferior as well? Second of all, I am not positive, but I’m pretty sure that it’s anatomically impossible to have sex the exact same way one would have intimate relations with a woman as one would have with a man. Plus, I feel it should be noted that in Leviticus (19:19), it also states, “'Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.” I don’t know about everyone else, but I have definitely sinned every day of my life, by wearing both cotton and denim.
I now find myself with a personal dilemma, should I remain in this religious organization or not? The people are really quite nice, when they aren’t inconsiderately ignoring anyone else’s viewpoints. But I don’t know how much longer I can take being classified as a “liberal”, because I have no moral objections with being alone in a room with someone of the opposite sex. However, if I am following their logic correctly, that if alone with someone, you must clearly be having sexual relations with them, which is of course forbidden unless married, wouldn’t it then be more objectionable to be alone with someone of the same sex then, because that would be a greater sin?
I would like to make a final note that if anyone is queer or questioning and has had a negative religious experience; I promise that not every religious individual is so unaccepting(some of us actually believe, “Judge not lest ye be judged.” [Matthew 7:1]), please do not let them deter you from God, if He is what you want, and I apologize on their behalf.
I find it so amusing that the members of this religious group claim to question their faith in the presence of nonbelievers, because the only thing recently that has caused me to question my faith is this so-called religious organization.
My topic for this post is religion. I realize that this can be a sensitive subject for many, but until recently I could never understand why, now I understand perfectly. I am a freshman in college and I am trying to get involved with a religious organization on campus, which I never knew would be so difficult. The reason I find this group so trying is because they continually bring up subjects that I feel have no place in any sort of worship service.
Exhibit one, at a combined meeting with several other religious organizations from about a dozen or so other college campuses, approximately two hundred of us listened to testimonies of how God touched and transformed a few individual’s lives. One of these testimonies was told by a fellow college student who had identified as gay until he recently found God, but now he has repented of his sinful ways. At this point in the service, everyone felt so moved by the Spirit that they had to give this poor young man a standing ovation, showered with plenty of “Hallelujahs” and “Amens”. (I personally felt so distraught that I was close to tears.) But wait - it gets better; with a triumphant smile upon his face, this poor boy rejoiced over the fact that he now has a girlfriend and together they pray for each other. (I’ve never realized that the point of being in a romantic relationship was to have a prayer partner.)
After the service was over, one of leaders in our campus’s group asked me what I thought of the testimonies, because she had apparently seen how appalled I was. I simply told her that I had never heard anything like that before in church and I’ve been an active Christian for my entire life. I continued that I am affiliated with the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A) who recently allowed members of the queer community to be pastors. Additionally, over winter break I attended “Jesus Camp” in North Carolina (Bible belt USA), where one of our speakers identified as a lesbian, and the overall consensus of the hundreds of conference attendees, also college students, was that we were so happy that she was able to share that with us. And sometimes the Bible is not always meant to be taken literally, because some of the references apply directly to the time period in which it was written. Her response to me was that although some passages in the Bible are not meant to be taken literally, these ones are, because being homosexual is referenced as a sin several times throughout the Bible.
I later researched, how often the Bible actually states that homosexuality is a sin. Although I was surprised the New Testament had a couple verses, the issue is only mentioned a handful of times throughout the entire Bible. It’s not like it’s referenced as many times as God’s infinite forgiveness and love. Besides one of the verses, Leviticus 18:22, “You must not have sexual intercourse with a male as one has sexual intercourse with a woman; it is a detestable act.” First of all, this is only addressing same-sexual relations between males and is only addressing a male audience in general. Does that mean that because there several references stating the inferiority of women, that women are truly inferior as well? Second of all, I am not positive, but I’m pretty sure that it’s anatomically impossible to have sex the exact same way one would have intimate relations with a woman as one would have with a man. Plus, I feel it should be noted that in Leviticus (19:19), it also states, “'Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material.” I don’t know about everyone else, but I have definitely sinned every day of my life, by wearing both cotton and denim.
I now find myself with a personal dilemma, should I remain in this religious organization or not? The people are really quite nice, when they aren’t inconsiderately ignoring anyone else’s viewpoints. But I don’t know how much longer I can take being classified as a “liberal”, because I have no moral objections with being alone in a room with someone of the opposite sex. However, if I am following their logic correctly, that if alone with someone, you must clearly be having sexual relations with them, which is of course forbidden unless married, wouldn’t it then be more objectionable to be alone with someone of the same sex then, because that would be a greater sin?
I would like to make a final note that if anyone is queer or questioning and has had a negative religious experience; I promise that not every religious individual is so unaccepting(some of us actually believe, “Judge not lest ye be judged.” [Matthew 7:1]), please do not let them deter you from God, if He is what you want, and I apologize on their behalf.
I find it so amusing that the members of this religious group claim to question their faith in the presence of nonbelievers, because the only thing recently that has caused me to question my faith is this so-called religious organization.
Friday, March 9, 2012
The Power of Storytelling
I wanted to use my blog space to tell you all about an awesome opportunity coming up this Tuesday! Faye Lane, the writer & performer behind Beauty Shop Stories, will be coming to Ramapo to perform her award-winning show at 7pm. Before the show, at 2pm, she will be in the Women's Center conducting a workshop called Write Your Own Story.
I am a strong believer in the power of personal stories. Despite the fact that everyone has a different set of circumstances and experiences, we can find common ground through the telling of stories. There's nothing quite like the feeling of validation that comes with hearing someone share an experience that mirrors your own, or the excitement that you can draw from hearing stories about a life completely different from your own.
This connection is what we've tried to generate in the Women's Center through the Body Image Monologues (which just finished it's second incarnation at Ramapo!) Having the chance to pour my feelings about my body onto a page, and then see that story performed in front of a room full of people was electrifying. Knowing that people who you don't even know can connect with your experiences is powerful and exciting and addictive. From the Body Image Monologues to Take Back the Night (in October) to Voices Not Bodies (in February) the Women's Center provides many annual experiences to connect in this manner.
I'm so excited that Faye Lane will be providing another chance for people to share their stories here at Ramapo, and I hope some of our blog readers will be interested in checking it out (while I am, regrettably, taking a midterm.) You don't have to be a writer - if you're a person who feels like they might have a story to tell you are welcome to come by and give it a shot.
On a somewhat related note, I'd love to share the pictures that we took at our eating Disorder Awareness Week table with you all. Last Monday and Tuesday people were invited to write and pose with some positive affirmations about body image, their bodies, etc. This was another awesome opportunity to connect and I loved seeing all of the unique things that people loved about themselves!
I am a strong believer in the power of personal stories. Despite the fact that everyone has a different set of circumstances and experiences, we can find common ground through the telling of stories. There's nothing quite like the feeling of validation that comes with hearing someone share an experience that mirrors your own, or the excitement that you can draw from hearing stories about a life completely different from your own.
This connection is what we've tried to generate in the Women's Center through the Body Image Monologues (which just finished it's second incarnation at Ramapo!) Having the chance to pour my feelings about my body onto a page, and then see that story performed in front of a room full of people was electrifying. Knowing that people who you don't even know can connect with your experiences is powerful and exciting and addictive. From the Body Image Monologues to Take Back the Night (in October) to Voices Not Bodies (in February) the Women's Center provides many annual experiences to connect in this manner.
I'm so excited that Faye Lane will be providing another chance for people to share their stories here at Ramapo, and I hope some of our blog readers will be interested in checking it out (while I am, regrettably, taking a midterm.) You don't have to be a writer - if you're a person who feels like they might have a story to tell you are welcome to come by and give it a shot.
On a somewhat related note, I'd love to share the pictures that we took at our eating Disorder Awareness Week table with you all. Last Monday and Tuesday people were invited to write and pose with some positive affirmations about body image, their bodies, etc. This was another awesome opportunity to connect and I loved seeing all of the unique things that people loved about themselves!
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Pinterest is Awesome!
And apparently, only for girls. The recent surge in Pinterest popularity has not gone unnoticed. Blogs and other review websites have evaluated the sharing site as a female retreat, or a "woman cave," so to speak. This may stem from the user statistics, which establish the majority of the population as female (just over 60%). However, a 60% female presence also means a 40% male presence. The user breakdown is similar to that of Tumblr, a similar sharing website. So why has Pinterest been labeled as a female domain? And what sort of effect does this presumption have?
Chances are, the content of the shared "pins" is what causes the feminine aura these folks seem to find around Pinterest. Generally, a great majority of popular pins can be categorized into food, exercise, style, and crafts. In our gender-boxed society, these are primarily female interests. It goes unrecognized that: ANYONE can take interest in these topics, or even individual items on a pin-by-pin basis (gasp!) and that there are PLENTY of pins revolving around topics such as science, cars, and architecture. The fact that society and the media is still gendering these topics is absurd-as much as I'd like to think everyone has a basic understanding that humans take interest in a great variety of human things, assumptions like this still happen all the time.
The fact that Pinterest is now directly associated with female interests and hobbies has influenced the success of the website. Though it has been exceptionally well-received by many individuals, as a whole the image is somewhat tainted. As a "female" network, many internet blogs fail to view Pinterest with the level of respect and seriousness that other social networking websites (such as Tumblr, Reddit, and Facebook) recieve. This has a distinctly sexist feel, as if websites associated with women (accurately or not) are less valuable than other sites. These stereotypes need to be broken down. In my ideal world, everyone would think for themselves. If you want to use Pinterest, use it! If you want to like style pins, or space pins, like them! Be true to yourself is ultimately the most important message I'd like to send in this blog. If this can be the mantra of individuals, perhaps society will follow suit and understand that attributing gendered stereotypes to everything is ridiculous.
For a more detailed analysis, read this article: http://tigerbeatdown.com/2012/02/29/but-pinterest-is-for-girls-sexism-and-social-media/
And to check out Pinterest for yourself, go here: www.pinterest.com
Chances are, the content of the shared "pins" is what causes the feminine aura these folks seem to find around Pinterest. Generally, a great majority of popular pins can be categorized into food, exercise, style, and crafts. In our gender-boxed society, these are primarily female interests. It goes unrecognized that: ANYONE can take interest in these topics, or even individual items on a pin-by-pin basis (gasp!) and that there are PLENTY of pins revolving around topics such as science, cars, and architecture. The fact that society and the media is still gendering these topics is absurd-as much as I'd like to think everyone has a basic understanding that humans take interest in a great variety of human things, assumptions like this still happen all the time.
The fact that Pinterest is now directly associated with female interests and hobbies has influenced the success of the website. Though it has been exceptionally well-received by many individuals, as a whole the image is somewhat tainted. As a "female" network, many internet blogs fail to view Pinterest with the level of respect and seriousness that other social networking websites (such as Tumblr, Reddit, and Facebook) recieve. This has a distinctly sexist feel, as if websites associated with women (accurately or not) are less valuable than other sites. These stereotypes need to be broken down. In my ideal world, everyone would think for themselves. If you want to use Pinterest, use it! If you want to like style pins, or space pins, like them! Be true to yourself is ultimately the most important message I'd like to send in this blog. If this can be the mantra of individuals, perhaps society will follow suit and understand that attributing gendered stereotypes to everything is ridiculous.
For a more detailed analysis, read this article: http://tigerbeatdown.com/2012/02/29/but-pinterest-is-for-girls-sexism-and-social-media/
And to check out Pinterest for yourself, go here: www.pinterest.com
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Old School Ridiculous Commercials
The four videos below are from the 1950s and are, honestly, ridiculous. They made me shake my head sadly, laugh, and facepalm... kind of all at once.
Enjoy!
Homophobia "Warning" PSA
Sexist Pepsi Commercial
Sexist Xerox Commercial
How to Spot a Communist!
Clearly, I couldn't resist the Commie video. An updated version (obviously featuring me as the Commie) is forthcoming. More seriously though, I can't decided which sexist ad is worse - the one where shopping is a competitive sport or the one where the woman is so incompetent she can do nothing but make copies. Also, how is it "winning" (re: the Pepsi ad) if you are required to purchase your trophies? I guess because you didn't earn the money? I mean, women aren't breadwinners. Ever. Right?
Le sigh. It's been 60 years, but have we come that far?
Eh, yes and no.
Dodge Charger Ad
Kickass Feminist Response
Enjoy!
Homophobia "Warning" PSA
Sexist Pepsi Commercial
Sexist Xerox Commercial
How to Spot a Communist!
Clearly, I couldn't resist the Commie video. An updated version (obviously featuring me as the Commie) is forthcoming. More seriously though, I can't decided which sexist ad is worse - the one where shopping is a competitive sport or the one where the woman is so incompetent she can do nothing but make copies. Also, how is it "winning" (re: the Pepsi ad) if you are required to purchase your trophies? I guess because you didn't earn the money? I mean, women aren't breadwinners. Ever. Right?
Le sigh. It's been 60 years, but have we come that far?
Eh, yes and no.
Dodge Charger Ad
Kickass Feminist Response
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
"Extremely Loud and Incredibly Gross": Rush Limbaugh and Birth Control
Last night on The Daily Show, in a segment called "Extremely Loud and Incredibly Gross," John Stewart discussed the issues surrounding the comments made by Rush Limbaugh on his radio show in regards to Sandra Fluke, a Georgetown University law student.
Limbaugh, a staunch conservative, called Fluke a "slut" and a "prostitute," all because she wants her contraception to be covered by her health insurance. In addition, he stated,
So what's all the fuss? Well, birth control is very, very expensive. Uterus-owners can find a handy calculator here, which asks for your age and preferred method of birth control, and then tells you how much you are likely to spend on contraceptives over the course of your child-bearing years, both with and without insurance. According to the calculator, Fluke, who is 30 years old, can expect to pay $34,699 out-of-pocket over the course of the next twenty-one years (the calculator assumes the age for menopause to be 51) if her insurance won't cover the costs. If her insurance would choose to cover birth control, the out-of-pocket cost could be brought down to $6,165, a much more manageable figure.
So is it really that unreasonable for Fluke - a student, and we all know that students don't exactly have a lot of money to spare - to want some help with this cost? Many who oppose birth control coverage seem to feel that this money would be coming out of their personal taxes - that their money would be paying for Fluke (and others like her) to get birth control, and in turn that they would be paying for Fluke to have sex. Such lines of thinking are precisely how we end up with people like Limbaugh calling Fluke a prostitute. In fact, it has nothing to do with taxes, because insurance is still private, but even if it did, as Stewart points out, we all pay for things we don't necessarily condone via our taxes. That's just the way it works. In addition, it should be noted that even with the expense of birth control being as high as it is, it's still cheaper than having a kid - a cost that the general public certainly wants no part of helping the individual with.
Limbaugh's claim that Fluke must be having "so much sex she can't afford the contraception," is the result of the absurd misconception that likens paying for birth control to paying each time someone has sex; women don't buy medically-prescribed birth control each time they have sex, and birth control costs don't vary depending on how often one actually has sex - it still needs to be taken every day in order to be effective. Limbaugh's statements, therefore, are not merely blown-out-of-proportion version of the truth, as some might want you to believe. They are entirely wrong, founded on narrow-minded views and misconceptions about women, sexuality, and birth control.
Birth control is part of the larger issue of women's health care, as Stewart points out. Another thing to be noted - women who want their birth control covered by their own insurance, not the government (yet another strange misconception people seem to have). They are not asking to have it for free, and the expense of others, but to have help paying for it from the insurance they already contribute to. Whether using birth control as contraception or to help with other health issues, it doesn't matter - as a medication prescribed by a doctor, it should be covered by insurance, because that's the very purpose of paying for insurance in the first place.
Limbaugh, a staunch conservative, called Fluke a "slut" and a "prostitute," all because she wants her contraception to be covered by her health insurance. In addition, he stated,
So, Miss Fluke, and the rest of you Feminazis, here's the deal. If we are going to pay for your contraceptives, and thus pay for you to have sex, we want something for it. We want you to post the videos online so we all can watch.Vile as that is, can we even be surprised? As Stewart points out, this sort of disgusting commentary is what Limbaugh is notorious for. What's unfortunate - and disturbing - is that his views are not as far from the norm as we might like to think, thus creating the raging debates about birth control currently fascinating the nation.
So what's all the fuss? Well, birth control is very, very expensive. Uterus-owners can find a handy calculator here, which asks for your age and preferred method of birth control, and then tells you how much you are likely to spend on contraceptives over the course of your child-bearing years, both with and without insurance. According to the calculator, Fluke, who is 30 years old, can expect to pay $34,699 out-of-pocket over the course of the next twenty-one years (the calculator assumes the age for menopause to be 51) if her insurance won't cover the costs. If her insurance would choose to cover birth control, the out-of-pocket cost could be brought down to $6,165, a much more manageable figure.
So is it really that unreasonable for Fluke - a student, and we all know that students don't exactly have a lot of money to spare - to want some help with this cost? Many who oppose birth control coverage seem to feel that this money would be coming out of their personal taxes - that their money would be paying for Fluke (and others like her) to get birth control, and in turn that they would be paying for Fluke to have sex. Such lines of thinking are precisely how we end up with people like Limbaugh calling Fluke a prostitute. In fact, it has nothing to do with taxes, because insurance is still private, but even if it did, as Stewart points out, we all pay for things we don't necessarily condone via our taxes. That's just the way it works. In addition, it should be noted that even with the expense of birth control being as high as it is, it's still cheaper than having a kid - a cost that the general public certainly wants no part of helping the individual with.
Limbaugh's claim that Fluke must be having "so much sex she can't afford the contraception," is the result of the absurd misconception that likens paying for birth control to paying each time someone has sex; women don't buy medically-prescribed birth control each time they have sex, and birth control costs don't vary depending on how often one actually has sex - it still needs to be taken every day in order to be effective. Limbaugh's statements, therefore, are not merely blown-out-of-proportion version of the truth, as some might want you to believe. They are entirely wrong, founded on narrow-minded views and misconceptions about women, sexuality, and birth control.
Birth control is part of the larger issue of women's health care, as Stewart points out. Another thing to be noted - women who want their birth control covered by their own insurance, not the government (yet another strange misconception people seem to have). They are not asking to have it for free, and the expense of others, but to have help paying for it from the insurance they already contribute to. Whether using birth control as contraception or to help with other health issues, it doesn't matter - as a medication prescribed by a doctor, it should be covered by insurance, because that's the very purpose of paying for insurance in the first place.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)