[Note: Jacques Mofeau is off but will return next week. What follows is a guest column done by Ms. Jacques Mofeau--my lovely wife. Yep, I roped her into doing one. Trying to con her into becoming a biweekly contributor...she definitely has the chops. Read on, and see for yourself.]
The other day I was on Facebook and one of my “friends” had posted this article: “Newest GOP Attack on Women: Just Say No to Tampons.” This is, of course, a farce, posted on the website freewoodpost.com, but it got me thinking. In the article (again, not real), Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) (who put together the Committee on contraception coverage that received so much attention because it was an all-male panel) was quoted as saying, “It is unnatural for a woman to insert a foreign object into her body for the sake of stopping the menstrual flow. I, as well as several others seek to eliminate the sales of such objects. Women should let nature take care of itself the way that our Almighty Creator intended. To try to manipulate and control such an occurrence goes against God’s plan for women.” Okay, so that’s crazy, but not too long ago I would have said the same thing about a group of men getting together and talking about women’s contraception choices and insurance coverage.
It’s all Obama’s fault. He decided it would be a good idea for insurance companies to be required to cover payment for contraception for women. That crazy guy. How dare he show support for women and their finances. How many men have paid for any contraception other than condoms? What do condoms cost, $15, $20? Okay, so what about the Pill or the Ring? That’s more like $50 a month. The IUD? Try $1500-$2000 for a 5-year coverage. Same for the Injection and the Rod Implant. And for those done with kids, let’s not forget the $10K+ tubal ligation (heaven forbid a man get a vasectomy, which is cheaper and less invasive and safer than tubal ligation). Yes, some insurances cover portions of these costs. When I purchased the Pill, I didn’t pay $50 a pop, but I generally paid more than the cost of condoms.
So would I say that my opinion is that it’s a good thing for insurance to fully pay for contraception? Yes, yes you could say that. Let me be clear that I am biased.
Somehow, though, this turned into a thing like gay marriage or abortions. Somehow, someone got the idea that if insurance companies are required to pay for contraception, then people are being forced to use contraception.
For example, along the abortion line, Rick Santorum went on Face the Nation and said that he was against prenatal testing (or rather, he was against insurance companies paying for prenatal testing) because “a lot of prenatal tests are done to identify deformities in utero and the customary procedure is to encourage abortions.” He went on to say “that people have the right to have prenatal testing done, ‘but to have the government force people to provide it free, to me, is a bit loaded’” (Face the Nation).
To add to it, he said (not on Face the Nation, but in another speech) that the only reason Obama wanted insurance companies to pay for prenatal testing was “”Because free prenatal testing ends up in more abortions and, therefore, less care that has to be done, because we cull the ranks of the disabled in our society’” (msn.com). The implication here is that if insurance is required to pay for prenatal testing then people will be made to get the testing and, if it’s determined they have a child with disabilities, they will be forced to get an abortion.
And Santorum’s take on insurance paying for contraception? “’This has nothing to do with access,’ he said. ‘This is having someone pay for it, pay for something that shouldn’t be in an insurance plan anyway because it is not, really an insurable item. This is something that is affordable, available. You don’t need insurance for these types of relatively small expenditures. This is simply someone trying to impose their values on somebody else, with the arm of the government doing so. That should offend everybody, people of faith and no faith that the government could get on a roll that is that aggressive’” (Washingtonmonthly.com). See my previous paragraph on the costs of contraception. I don’t know about other women, but $50/month or $2000 every 5 years is not a “relatively small expenditure”.
Along these lines, there was this segment on the TODAY show (yes, I’m quoting the TODAY show) in which a panel of 2 women and one man were asked their opinions on the creation of the first male birth control pill. The two women expressed interest; again, see my paragraph on the cost of birth control. I know I think it would be nice for a man to burden some of the responsibility of contraception. The male panelist, however, said something about how he had a daughter and he’d hate for her to relinquish her power over contraception to a man who would likely be unreliable in taking a pill. Maybe this is true; maybe a man wouldn’t be reliable and maybe it’s still a good idea for the woman to take measures to prevent pregnancy. But all I could think was 1) are women so reliable? I’m sure there are women who said they were on the pill who really weren’t. And 2) I’ve never met a man who would deliberately sabotage contraception. Most men are pretty firm on not wanting to get a girl pregnant (unless they’re in a stable relationship and pregnancy has been discussed and planned).
So, what about this all-male panel that talked about the insurance-contraception issue? The premise was that these were religious leaders, and they stated they felt this issue was a freedom of religion rather than a women’s rights/contraception issue. Obama’s policy was going to force religious groups who were anti-abortion/contraception to pay for it. But what were they actually talking about? Contraception. And again, who pays for contraception most of the time? Women. I know that for many women, taking away or prohibiting insurance payment for contraception would result in women not being able to afford it, and then you’ve got more women getting pregnant when they don’t want to. Maybe that would lead to a rise in abortions? Maybe. So how was it that no one thought it would be a good idea to have a woman on that panel? Wouldn’t it be useful to have a female perspective, since women would be the people affected by this ruling, either way?
Shortly after this panel met and the feminist crap hit the fan, SNL’s Amy Poehler cameoed on the show to do a skit with Seth Meyers called “Really?” Maybe the best joke centered around Foster Freiss’ comment that when he was young, women used an aspirin between their knees as contraception. Freiss later apologized for the comment, but Poehler said in the skit: “’Well, we'd love to accept your apology, Foster, but you made a mistake -- and now you're going to have to live with that mistake for the rest of your life.’" Check it out on Hulu.com.
And let’s not forget our friend Rush Limbaugh. Of course he had to put in his two cents. Recently he was quoted as saying during a broadcast, in response to the female Georgetown student who was denied the right to speak at a one of the contraception hearings, that the student (Sandra Fluke) was a “slut” and then added “if we’re 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 can all watch” (huffingtonpost.com). I think I must quote Seth and Amy and say, “Really??!” Using contraception makes women sluts? What about those of us who are married, in long-term, committed relationships? Just because we don’t want to be Michelle Dugger doesn’t make us sluts for using contraception.
Again, we have a man expressing his (admittedly extreme) opinions about contraception, but where are the women? Yes, the women in Congress are voicing their concerns. Congresswomen Maloney and Norton walked out on one of the committee meetings, and others have since condemned the meetings as an affront to women’s rights.
I’ve never identified myself as a feminist, per se. I’ve never protested or marched or written letters to fight for a right or freedom. I have been fortunate enough to live in an era in which women experience the full gamut of freedoms when it comes to our bodies. Despite the debates, we are allowed to get abortions in most places. We are allowed to make our own choices for contraception and family planning. I’m not saying things are perfect, but compared to how things have been in the past, I have it pretty good.
But now I’m getting worried. I read The Handmaid’s Tale. I can see how bad this could go if something isn’t done. Truth? I don’t think this debate is about the freedom of religion. I think it is about the access to contraception (and possibly, abortions). It worries me that a lot of these meetings and panels and discussions include men, but few women. It worries me that many of the Republican candidates are anti-abortion and anti-contraception (or at least anti-insurance-paying-for-contraception). It worries me that the state of Virginia attempted to pass a bill that would require a transvaginal ultrasound for women requesting an abortion and another bill that would essentially ban both abortion and the use of hormonal contraception in the state. It worries me that the Catholic church withdrew its support (financially and otherwise) of St. Joseph’s hospital in Arizona when a physician performed an abortion on a woman whose pregnancy would almost certainly kill her if allowed to continue (thewashingtonpost.com). For me, these events are akin to a women’s rights apocalypse. It did make me feel a little better when I read that the bill proposed to reverse the Obama birth control policy was defeated in the Senate, but only by a narrow margin of 51-48. That’s too close for comfort.
I may have no venue to protest, except for this article. I also have power in the form of the vote, which is still a freedom allowed to me as a woman, for now. I can only hope that this article informs the uninformed and perhaps encourages those not registered to vote to please do so, since this is an issue that will affect every woman in this country, one way or the other.
No comments:
Post a Comment