5 Perspectives on the Recent Birth Control Ruling

Imagine how happy I was to find this message sitting in my inbox Monday morning:

Today, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) announced that it will require all new insurance plans to cover birth control without co-pays under the new health reform law. This is one of the biggest victories for women’s health in a generation.

It feels like we're part of history here, doesn't it? This ruling is a huge, exciting deal, and it's been fun to see the feminist community alive with celebration these past few days. The fight for women's rights is a long, brutal one, but victories like these make it all worth it.

Since the "birth control conversation" is often restricted to the twenties-and-older sphere, I wanted to get some younger perspectives on this momentous ruling. Naturally, I turned to my feminist blogger friends!

Perspective #1: Talia P. (Star of Davida)

I don’t think I have to tell any American how much medical insurance stinks nowadays. Between the poor economy, unemployment rate, and increasingly expensive cost of living, among all the other blechy, costly stuff we have to deal with, most people are forced to view medication as a luxury. One of my mom’s doctors told her that he had prescribed Lipitor for another patient, and the patient told him that it was a choice between buying food and paying for the prescription. Thankfully, women will no longer have to make the Hobson’s choice between necessary items and birth control.

Birth control is an absolute staple of a truly feminist society. If women don’t have easy access to birth control (whether in the form of a diaphragm, pill, or whatever else), then they aren’t able to effectively control their bodies, the ultimate feminist goal. So if a woman has to pay some ridiculous co-pay for it (one of my mom’s meds is $180), that sort of defeats the whole purpose. That’s why this ruling is absolutely awesome — women now have a real choice. I know a lot of people think the term “birth control” is a euphemism, but I really think it’s a great description of what it really is: controlling if/when you want to try to have a child with your significant other.

No co-pay birth control is also important for women who need the Pill to treat cramps during their periods. I’m lucky, since all I need are a couple of Advils and I’m a happy camper, but a number of my friends would be climbing up the walls in pain if they weren’t on the Pill. I’m sure that it’s a relief for them, and all the other dysmenorrheal women out there, not to have to pay co-pays for it anymore.

So, I think it’s absolutely awesome that there are no longer any co-pays for birth control. Even if I didn’t, it would be too bad — the ruling was already made!

Perspective #2: Randi S. (The Radical Idea)

This ruling has truly been an amazing victory, reaffirming a woman's right to control her own fertility, something that has been battled over for 50 years. The United States, as a leader in global family planning programs, has set an important example with this decision by the Dept. of Health and Human Services. They have also struck an incredible blow against opponents of Planned Parenthood by reaffirming the immense importance that women have access to preventative healthcare.  

But moreover, this is an important step in ensuring that women all over our country continue to have access to birth control, even as the battle over the organizations that distribute the Pill are waged. Because this announcement comes from the federal level, it sends a message to the states that they need to look out for women and protect women's health.  Especially at a time when it seems like there is constant fighting over Planned Parenthood and other family planning organizations, it is reassuring to know that at least some parts of our government (HHS, the Dept of Justice) are still looking out, not for their political careers, but for the American people.

Randi is doing a similar post on her blog, The Radical Idea. If you'd like to submit your opinion about the HHS birth control ruling or the recent victory for Planned Parenthood in Kansas, please email her at radicalbutlogical@gmail.com!

Perspective #3: Becka W. (Becka Tells It All)

So the Department of Health recently announced that all insurance providers in new plans must completely cover birth control — which means that the Department of Health (and the Obama Administration) is an advocate for women’s health and freedom. Here’s why:

• Birth Control isn’t just for pregnancy prevention. Birth Control also helps regulate a woman’s period, ease crippling cramps, and prevent diseases like ovarian cancer and anemia. 
• This enables all women to feel free to live their lives the way they choose. It’s no secret that birth control can get expensive. Many women pay $50+ a month for birth control. That’s $600 a year — minimum. 
• More than half of women in the U.S. ages 18-34 say that these high costs make it difficult for them to use birth control consistently. And it’s no secret that birth control access, like health care, is unequal. Nearly 60% of young adult Latinas and more than half of African-American women have struggled to pay for prescription birth control. 
• Even abortion can carry a huge price tag or be difficult to obtain in many states thanks to changing laws, and women with unintended pregnancies may end up with less education, earn less, and their children are less likely to graduate high school. 
• It’s actually going to help balance the Federal Budget! Accidental pregnancy costs taxpayers $11 billion a year — and that’s a conservative estimate.  
• The new law doesn’t only require birth control coverage — it also covers co-pays for cervical cancer/HPV screenings, counseling/screening for HIV and STDs, and other important care. 
• This is a huge deal, and one of the biggest successes in women’s sexual health and freedom since Roe v. Wade (which has been challenged by conservative opponents more often than not in the past 30 years). Making health care for women a priority is a definite victory for us for years to come.

But — the fight isn’t over yet. The HHS is considering the inclusion of a clause that allows some religious employers to deny women access to this care. They are taking comments on the ruling for 60 days, and now is your chance to speak out and tell them you support ALL women receiving the care they need! 

Perspective #4: Sophie R. (Grrrl Beat) 

Though obviously a very happy victory, the news of the HHS’s requirement for insurance companies to provide no co-pay birth control was a surprise. From Planned Parenthood and abortion clinics closing across the country, to the much less serious premier of a pro-life horror film called The Life Zone, this year has not been so good for women’s reproductive health rights.

The HHS’s decision is a huge step forward for women’s reproductive health, and an equally huge blow to the Republicans' “War on Women." In addition to birth control, the no co-pay coverage will also include yearly preventative-care visits; STI, HPV, and HIV screenings; gestational diabetes testing; and more. Yes, women will still have to pay for insurance (unlike some countries that distribute birth control completely free of charge), but even so, this decision is a huge improvement for women’s healthcare in the U.S.

As with anything that acknowledges a woman’s right to have control over her body (god forbid!), there has been a lot of criticism. Fox News host Bill O’Reilly said in response: “Many women who get pregnant are blasted out of their minds when they have sex, they’re not going to use birth control anyways.” Beyond being completely offensive, this statement ignores the fact that insurance companies will be providing birth control pills, not just immediate-effect contraceptives like the ones O’Reilly refers to. Fox News political commentator Dana Perino added: “If you can afford a $5 frappuccino at Starbucks, you can pay your $5 co-pay.”

I don’t think that one is worth refuting.

What these misguided (and quite amusing) critics don’t acknowledge (along with facts and common sense) is that the question of no co-pay birth control is one of equality. When women are forced to pay hundreds of dollars for reproductive health care a year that men don’t have to pay, that tips the already unbalanced scale even further against women. With the HHS’s decision, that scale tips a little closer to equilibrium.

Perspective #5: Catelyn B. (Throw Back Rag)

I think this is great! every woman should have access to birth control no matter what! "It's our birth control and we want it now!"

Further Reading:

Want to know more about the HHS ruling or contraception in general? These resources were provided to me by a representative of the National Women's Law Center!

• NWLC Hails Dept. of Health And Human Services Decision On Women’s Preventive Health Care

• Big News For Women's Health: Birth Control Without Co-Pays Now A Reality (By Judy Waxman)

• Good Day for Breastfeeding: Breastfeeding Expenses Get Covered Without Co-Pay (By Melanie Ross Levin)

• "We've Got You Covered" Birth Control Blog Carnival

• Contraception Coverage (Resources from the NWLC)

For Teens: Why Talking About Birth Control Matters

This post is for a blog carnival called "Birth Control: We've Got You Covered," which is being sponsored by the National Women's Law Center. Soon the Web is going to light up with who-knows-how-many bloggers, each giving their own two cents on no-cost birth control and other related issues. Personally, I want to speak to teens and younger girls about why birth control is so dang important (even if it doesn't figure into all of our lives just yet).

Those ain't no Sweet Tarts!

If you're a relatively new feminist like I am (my glorious "click" moment only came about a year ago), it's easy to get sucked up into the feminist agenda — everything from equal pay to reproductive rights — without thinking too deeply about these issues or considering why they're so pivotal to the women's liberation movement.

New feminists, especially us young'uns, seem to go through a crazed, sugar-rushed phase where we're just so excited to be a part of something bigger than ourselves. We start calling out sexist jokes in the produce department, we start doodling feminist-y things in our school notebooks, and we can't help but pose like Rosie the Riveter each time we catch ourselves in a mirror.
(Tip: Don't do this in public. People will stare.)

Don't get me wrong, this "feminist awakening" phase is zealous and incredibly life-affirming, but it can also hurt us if we begin nodding our heads to every single thing our feminist role models say just for the sake of proving our "feminist-ness." (I was guilty of that when I started calling myself pro-choice just because "all the feminists were doing it." I still call myself pro-choice, but now I've got the understanding to back it up. Yea-yuh.)

Support for birth control is one of those feminist ideals that "comes with the job description," but how many times, as teens, do we sit down and actually talk about it, or think about the implications it will have for our futures?

*cricket chirps*

That's what I thought.

Support for birth control has been synonymous with the feminist movement for decades, but when many of our older feminist allies (and I don't mean "older" in a bad way, just literally "older" than those of us born in the Era of Classic Nicktoons) talk about birth control and contraception, the focus automatically shifts to women in their 20's and 30's. Like birth control doesn't also affect our lives.

If you're a young person today, you know about sex. 

Say NO to virgin-whore dichotomy.

Sex saturates every ounce of media that we soak up: it's in books, movies, video games, steamy vampire dramas, the list goes on and on. Parents need to realize that if we're not getting our information from them (via one of those mythical "sex talks"), we're getting our information from less reliable sources — and many times this misinformation is coupled with ridiculous virgin-whore dichotomy (i.e. "good girls don't do that") which makes us even more confused about what the hell is going on with our bodies, about what's acceptable and what's not.

We get it, parents.

It's weird to think about your "babies" as sexual beings (it's weird for us, too, believe me), but that's no excuse to keep us from the realities of sex, contraception, STDs, and pregnancy. And just because we're not on The Pill now, doesn't mean that someday we won't be. As feminists, teens, girls: we need to know that contraception matters.

Right now, the Department of Health and Human Services is deciding "whether or not prescription contraceptives should be available under new healthcare plans without co-pay or other out-of-pocket costs." If the DHHS comes out with a favorable opinion, that could mean no-cost birth control for countless women nationwide. Considering birth control can cost upward of $100 per month (depending on one's method), many women in today's economy have had to choose between contraception and cancer screenings, between contraception and groceries.

In the 50's and 60's, many women were hearing about their
reproductive options for the first time. (Shock!)

The average woman spends three quarters of her reproductive life trying to prevent pregnancy, so yeah, birth control is a big deal. The National Women's Law Center is hopeful that the DHHS will "see the light" on this issue, and ultimately heed the recommendations given by a non-partisan, independent panel of scientific and medical experts at the Institute of Medicine (the panel's recommendations range from providing "yearly well-woman preventative care visits" to "screening and counseling to detect and prevent interpersonal and domestic violence").

For the millions of women who rely on birth control to keep their options open, and for your future and mine, I really hope the DHHS is able to reach a favorable consensus. In teen lingo: I hope they don't screw the heck up.

But until then, let's place our hands on our chins, act cool, and ponder some random facts birth control . . .

• About the time your grandparents were growing up (assuming they were born in the 50's or earlier), birth control was taboo. Many states had laws (i.e. the Comstock Laws) that not only banned people from using contraception, but from distributing any shred of information about it whatsoever. Also in those days, women were often expected to marry at a young age and have large families, regardless of any plans they had for the future.
• Unintended pregnancies can be harmful to women who have preexisting health conditions such as hypertension or coronary artery disease. A true testament to "it's better to be safe than sorry."
• Data shows that between 1990 and 2004, U.S. pregnancy rates declined almost 40 percent among 15- to 19-year-old women. One study attributed 86 percent of the long-term decline in teen pregnancies to increased contraceptive use.
• Planned pregnancies (which, as the NWLC points out, usually require contraception) allow women time to make certain lifestyle changes that will promote healthy babies.
• When it comes to HIV, sex is 10,000 times safer with a condom than without one.
• Birth control allows women to choose whether they want to start families earlier in life, hold off to pursue other endeavors (like, you know, kicking ass in college and the working world), or not have kids at all.

Birth control gives "power to the people," or rather, it gives women the opportunity to make choices that are right for their personal, individual lives. We're all different, life is short, and we should all be given the choice of how we spend our time — raising a family, going to work, or maybe even both. 

Nothing should be off-limits to us.

Pro-Choice is Pro-Life (By Amelia G.)

This article was written by Amelia G., a woman who describes herself as "an undergraduate, feminist, seafood enthusiast, bookworm (and, more recently, blogworm)." She writes for Plenty of Otherwise!

"If you can't trust a woman with a choice,
how can you trust her with a baby?"

The other day I came across an article in the Michigan Messenger about how Thaddeus McCotter, a Republican running for president in 2012, signed a "Pro-life leadership pledge." This means that if elected, he'll "nominate pro-life judges, select pro-life cabinet members, de-fund Planned Parenthood and support legislation that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy."

That news didn't exactly surprise me, but it still pissed me off, especially given the fresh batch of anti-choice news that has popped up in the U.S. this week. The Executive Council in New Hampshire just voted to de-fund Planned Parenthood. And yesterday, a federal judge blocked a law that would have required Crisis Pregnancy Centers, or CPCs, to disclose particular information about themselves, such as whether they employ licensed medical personnel.

CPCs pose as abortion clinics, but do not provide abortion or contraceptives (nor do they refer women to organizations that do). As the Ms. article points out, CPCs are notorious for providing false medical information about abortion in order to scare women out of considering it as a viable option that might work for them.

I'm really uncomfortable knowing that I live in a country whose government damn near shut down over an argument about whether to de-fund an organization that does as much good as Planned Parenthood. And it hurts even more to learn that people are actively working to ensure that the nation's laws are on the side of CPCs that flat-out lie to women who come to them for help and comprehensive information.

As someone who cares deeply about reproductive justice and people in general, I'd like to take this opportunity to explain — to Representative McCotter, Judge Pauley, and everyone else behind all of the legislation that has come up since the last election — that pro-choice is pro-life.

A lot of people will be surprised to hear this, but I didn't always identify as pro-choice.

Yeah, really. Because let's face it: the rhetoric sounds great. Don't kill babies. That's something I could totally get behind, you know?

Neither of my parents are U.S. citizens, so they can't vote. Therefore, politics just weren't discussed in our house when I was growing up. I've read that statistically, parents have a great deal of influence over their children's political views. That wasn't really the case for me. I had a few opinions, but those were based shallowly on what I felt to be common sense.

So, when asked for my views on abortion, I would proudly declare that I was pro-life and thought abortion was wrong.

But once I got to high school, I noticed that a lot of people I really respected were especially passionate about their pro-choice views. And important things were going on at the time that forced me to seriously reevaluate my stance. In 2006, when I was a junior, my school district considered adopting an abstinence-only sex education program, to replace the comprehensive one that was in place.

People went apeshit. Friends of mine spoke out against the proposal at school board meetings. Medical professionals came in from out of town to voice their opinion, too. And in the end, we stuck with a comprehensive program.

I was pleased with the school board's decision not to adopt an abstinence only program (even though I didn't believe in abortion, I wasn't quite that conservative; I've always fully supported birth control). But I still could not understand how or why my friends felt so strongly about the abortion issue in particular. And because I knew my friends to be intelligent, compassionate people, I wanted to understand their point of view, so I started researching the topic.

I don't remember a specific moment when I "became pro-choice." I do know, though, that I kept finding instances where I could see myself agreeing that abortion was an acceptable option: rape, incest, poverty, etc.

But what won me over fully in the end were the personal anecdotes. By reading tons of stories about women's experiences with pregnancy, I discovered that it was impossible to put them into boxes marked with the aforementioned labels. It hit me that I couldn't call myself pro-life without taking women's lives and diverse experiences into consideration.

The Supreme Court's upholding of the "partial birth abortion" ban in 2007 (the year I graduated from high school) is the event that both tested and solidified my new pro-choice views. I was furious with the decision, even though when George W. Bush had signed the bill four years prior, I hadn't had a problem with it. That's because on the surface, "partial birth abortion" sounds awful; it evokes images of selfish women who, after 35 weeks of pregnancy, suddenly freak out and realize that they don't want to carry the pregnancy to term. So they go out and have an abortion.

But for one thing, "partial birth abortion" is not a medical term; it was coined by right-wing politicians. And secondly, come on, there have to be reasons for women to get an abortion that late in the game.

And damn good ones, at that.

One woman's story has really stuck with me over the years. It appears on page 14 of  The War on Choice by Gloria Feldt:

We were awaiting the arrival of a son. I'm diabetic, so I had more prenatal testing than most women. At twenty-five weeks I had an ultrasound and the doctor's exact words were, "Vick, you are disgustingly normal and so is the baby." At thirty-two weeks I went in for another ultrasound and my world came crashing down. They discovered that [the fetus] had not grown past twenty-five weeks, and further testing revealed that he had nine major anomalies, including a fluid-filled cranium with no brain tissue at all. He could never have survived outside my womb. My body was the only thing keeping him alive, and I chose to remove my son from life support. I'm a mom. I had three beautiful children, and in fact I have a new baby boy who's here with me now. Who are the people on the anti-choice side to judge me? They've never been in my shoes. I never in my wildest dreams thought something like this could happen, but it happened to me.

The abortion she had in 1996 was made illegal under the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act. Her experience reminds me of the woman in NE who, earlier this year, was denied an abortion and forced to watch her baby die in her arms shortly after giving birth.

So this is why I feel so strongly that lawmakers should not get between a woman and her doctor. As NARAL's Speak Out for Choice Award recipient Katie Stack said earlier this year during her acceptance speech: "Women's experiences with abortion are nuanced and complicated. But . . . if [we are] given the opportunity to share these diverse realities, we can begin to challenge the stereotypes and falsehoods that are promoted by the anti-choice movement."

Pro-choice is pro-life. That's something I firmly believe and discovered simply by being curious and open. By reading. By trusting/caring about people, and respecting their personal opinions and choices.

I don't think that's too much to ask of humanity.

A Modest Proposal (Abortion Edition)

Last year in class we read A Modest Proposal (1729) by Jonathan Swift. It's a satirical piece in which Swift suggests that the Irish should eat their own babies rather than tackle problems of overpopulation and poverty head-on. We were asked to write a similarly satirical piece about an impassioned issue, so I chose abortion rights. [WARNING: The keyword here is "satire," people!]

Which side am I really on?

Written October 9, 2010

Abortion has been one of the most fiercely debated topics of the 21st century, and frankly, I’m tired of hearing about it. If right-wingers truly believe abortion is a sin, and the women who choose to abort are evil, heartless murderers, it’s time to do something rather than settle for bad picket signs and expect anything to happen. What, are we just going to say “no more abortions!” and wait for them to disappear like rats up a drain pipe? We need to get to the root of the problem.

First, we need to ask ourselves: what drives women to have abortions? Are these women simply born with demonic souls, or are they driven to kill after years of reckless partying, drinking, and hardcore drugs (because obviously, any woman callous enough to get an abortion must be sniffing the Big H)? 

Some will have you believe that the decision has less to do with a woman’s lifestyle, and more with what she can expect for the future of her baby. If a woman becomes pregnant, these pro-choicers cry, and her partner is irresponsible, refuses to pay child support, or just gets up and leaves, she may not have the means to provide for a child. Pro-choicers want us to think that if a woman has a dead-end job, absolutely no support, and struggles just to find her next meal, it’s okay for her to choose an abortion rather than let her child suffer. 

Evil, right?

I propose three solutions to the abortion epidemic in this country. First, we must outlaw condoms and sex education. By exposing children to the mechanics of sex and pregnancy prevention as early as middle school, we’re basically telling them (a) it’s okay to “get jiggy with it,” and (b) there are ultimately no consequences because any mistake (i.e. pregnancy) can simply be undone (i.e. abortion). By outlawing condoms, couples will know that their actions may result in an unwanted pregnancy, and they’ll refrain from doing the deed in the first place.

Next, we must set up a national fund to pay women for choosing life over murder. If a poverty-stricken woman is given a choice between having an abortion or receiving a lump sum and letting her baby live, she’ll definitely choose the money. Thus, dinner is served and she can live happily ever after — guilt and problem free — with her bouncing bundle of joy.

Finally, we must make it illegal for two people to have “relations” without first signing mutual contracts in which they provide vital information, including (but not limited to): their name, age, sex, complete medical history, social security number, financial records, and high school transcript. By making the intimate details of our medical histories accessible to the public, we will know at once who has heart conditions, bladder control problems, hemorrhoids, STDs, clinical baldness, etc. and can thus make better decisions about our sexual partners. Not to mention, women will never be in the position of deciding whether or not to keep her child because of an irresponsible partner — she will already have access to his bank account! It’s the perfect solution!

As long as we’re willing to give up any shred of privacy whatsoever and allow the government to have free reign over our personal lives, we can eradicate abortion in America once and for all.

Sure, we could take the easy route and assume women are intelligent and conscientious enough to make their own decisions about their own bodies; we could have faith in the fact that women don’t take abortion lightly, that they think about it long and hard, and are affected by it each and every day for the rest of their lives; we could even focus on better sex education and allow free access to birth control to lessen the chance that couples would have to face an unplanned pregnancy in the first place.

But we’re Americans, and we don’t like to take the easy route.

Female, Not A Marionette (By Jennifer J.)

Who's pulling your strings?

This piece was submitted by Jennifer J., a teen feminist and humanist. Jennifer would like to communicate with other teens who share her values, and end up making the world a better place for women to speak out!

If I am writing this now, it is because I feel the need to share this with other females out there who might go through the same situation. Today, I have just realized what I am to other people, especially males. 

I am not exactly the type of girl who "goes after" somebody right after some silly talk. I like to know them first and try to be connected. I have a very big heart, but I don’t show it that much. On the outside I am the tough and cold girl you would never approach, but on the inside I am the girl who loves and cares. The only reason I don’t demonstrate it is because I have learned that the more you show how warm-hearted you are, the more people will take advantage of you. 

And so, when people would draw near me, I would be indifferent, not showing any emotions. But there was one person who, despite my frostiness, approached me and faced everything I threw at him. To me that was incredible; usually people would be distant because of how cold I am. Only he had the bravery to talk to me. 

Of course we talked for a while. We got to know each other and started talking about more romantic subjects. Like many guys, he wanted to be more intimate, however I wasn't comfortable with that. I would rather talk about these kind of things and fuel the imagination than actually be intimate with somebody. I still consider myself a little girl; I don’t want to go that far.

After arguing about it several times, I decided to drop it and delete this guy from my contacts. Was that supposed to feel bad? Well, I did feel bad about doing that for some reason. I added him back and we continued talking to each other. As time passed, he was really getting serious and that critically put pressure on me. My body is a temple. I am not supposed to be pressured because of it, right? 

I decided then to talk to him about it. I told him that I shouldn’t be pressured and that we should slow things down. Today, I realize that he obliterated me. Now it makes me think about how and what I am to males. 

I am a female, and I am intelligent, beautiful, graceful, important and trustworthy. My body is sacred and not a universal pathway. I am talking now in the name of all females in the world. We are not something people can just use for their fantasies. We are love, care, comfort and attention. We are strength, courage and beauty. What makes guys think that we can be the tissue they blow in? 

Our bodies are the reason why there is a world and a worldwide population. We bear life in us. We are to be respected and loved. So I will state this one very last thing and if you can, read it out loud:

“I am a woman and not a marionette.”  

SlutWalk Seattle and the Awesomeness that Ensued

I was so excited to attend SlutWalk Seattle with my friend Sera two weekends ago. Seattle got a very interesting makeover (see pictures above) when hundreds of people gathered to protest an all too common (and completely ridiculous) notion: that women "should avoid dressing like sluts in order not to be victimized."

As the event's website explains:

People aren’t assaulted because they invited it or enticed others to it by looking a certain way; they’re assaulted because somebody chose to assault them. Saying that survivors could have protected themselves by not looking like “sluts” implies that the survivors are at fault and creates a culture in which the heinous crime of sexual assault is seen as no big deal.

This was my first real "protest." I probably saw more skin that day than I've seen in my entire life, but the fact that people could be so bold in order to make a point (i.e. it doesn't matter what you're wearing — or not wearing — rape is never okay) was truly inspiring. In my nothing-fancy Seinfeld t-shirt and jeans I felt a little intimidated at first, but once I started talking to random people and asking to take their pictures, I realized that these were some of the kindest and most activism-driven people I'd ever met in my life.

Sorry for the cliche, but you really can't judge a book by its cover.

The event itself consisted of marching from Cal Anderson Park to Westlake Center, both in Seattle. The atmosphere was incredibly positive and uplifting, even though we got a visit from the infamous Westboro Baptist Church. If you've never heard of WBC, they've gained national media attention for protesting the funerals of fallen soldiers and spreading their hateful, homophobic, anti-Semitic religious dogma at a variety of high-profile events. WBC hates Jews, homosexuals, the U.S. military, sluts (and many others, I'm sure), and are known for their bold, colorful signs that say everything from "Aids Cures F*gs" to "Thank God for Dead Soldiers."

I was excited to see WBC in person. I wanted to see the idiocy up close.

I didn't get any good shots of WBC in Seattle, so I had to Google a photo.
This is actually one of the less offensive pictures I found!

But, I don't want to waste time talking about these assholes. If you'd like to spend the next hour or so yelling at your computer monitor, I suggest you Google them. *smiles*

For me, the most surreal and passionate and amazing part of the protest was when everybody chanted together. Hundreds of voices tangled to create a gigantic, powerful echo; we rattled the entire city with sayings like "Wherever we go, however we dress, no means no, and yes means yes!" and "When women's rights are under attack, what we do? Stand up! Fight back!"

If you can imagine the strangest collection of people ever — men, women, children, the elderly — of every orientation, color, body shape, and style of dress — all united by a common cause, that's what SlutWalk Seattle felt like. Being a feminist can feel lonely and alienating when it seems like the world is against you, but last Sunday I was embraced by an entire community of people who were willing to risk anything to fight for women's rights.

Another poignant part of the day was when we heard from Cee Fisher, a member of a socialist feminist organization called Radical Women. At one point she screamed "Show Seattle what a feminist looks like!" into her microphone, and everyone in the crowd pointed to themselves and repeated the sentiment.

I'm not a loud person by any means. But when Cee Fisher challenged us to show the city — neigh, the world — what a feminist looked like, I pointed to myself and screamed along with everyone else.

You know those times when you feel so impassioned you just want to cry?

That was one of those moments.
____________________________

There were some very powerful speakers at SlutWalk. We heard from feminists, a spoken word artist, and even people who've experienced rape and sexual assault first-hand. Here's a video of one speaker who nearly had me in tears. A recent women's studies major and graduate of the University of Washington, this woman explained what she had to go through to convict her attacker.

More Pictures:

• SlutWalk Seattle 2011 (Flickr)
• SlutWalk Seattle Photos (Facebook)

News Articles:

• Reclaiming Stereotypes by Kirsten Johnson (UW Newspaper)
• SlutWalk aims to empower women through a bold message by Elizabeth Dinh (Komo News)
• Rape awareness aim of Sunday's SlutWalk in Seattle by Katherine Long (Seattle Times)
• Hundreds march in Seattle 'SlutWalk' demonstration by Tonya Mosley (King 5 News)

77% of Anti-Abortion Leaders

Speaks for itself, eh?

20 Ways to Lessen Your Risk of Sexual Assault

(Above) One of the many campaign ads
from Men Can Stop Rape, an
organization that seeks to redefine
masculinity and "mobilize men to
use their strength for creating cultures
 free from violence, especially
men's violence against women."

This article was submitted to me by Corrine at NursingDegree.net.

It's heartbreaking that I have to post this, but clearly sexual assault is an issue that we can't overlook. According to the Rape Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN), a person in the U.S. is sexually assaulted every two minutes. According to that logic, there will be another victim — maybe two — by the time you finish reading this article.

Extending emotional support to sexual assault and rape survivors is certainly a topic for another post, but the link I'm about to share contains tips that could potentially spare you the pain of ever being caught off-guard in a dangerous situation. Sure, some of the tips are no-brainers (i.e. be aware of your surroundings), but if it could mean the difference between going into a situation prepared and going in unprepared, why not take a few minutes to look these tips over?

Here are the first 3 tips from 20 Ways to Lessen Your Risk of Sexual Assault:

1. Enroll in self-defense classes: Nearly every major city — and plenty of suburbs — hosts at least a few different self-defense and martial arts schools, as do many colleges and universities. Try to find one within a viable price range and workable schedule and put forth the effort to take regular classes. Make sure to also thoroughly research both the businesses and the different strategies they teach before making any commitment. Even if participants never have to put their newfound skills to use (and here’s hoping they don’t!), self-defense is one of the most valuable investments individuals make for their own safety and peace of mind.
2. Carry a weapon: Consider supplementing those self-defense classes by keeping a weapon concealed somewhere, like a purse or underneath a jacket. For those uncomfortable with the thought of owning a gun, options such as pepper spray, mace, stun guns or batons and plenty more provide a satisfactory level of protection as well. No matter which one proves best, however, anyone owning such devices must absolutely familiarize themselves with proper care, use, maintenance and (of course) legalities. Particularly when looking into gun ownership.
3. Travel in packs: It’s not always possible to step out with a few friends in tow, but take advantage of any situations where it is. Predators feed on vulnerability, as assault and rape have everything to do with power and almost nothing to do with sex. A small group, particularly one with a little self-defense training and/or weapons in the ranks, will certainly make each member feel far safer than if they were to travel alone. This strategy works well for parties, too, as a throng of trusted pals can look out for one another and intervene when it looks like something ugly might happen.
   Read the rest of the article here
   Check out these unsettling statistics from the RAINN's website:

___________________________

Update: Literally two seconds after publishing this article I found this post over at Teenagerie.com. The author's take on this "who should be responsible for preventing sexual assault" situation really touched me. Obviously, a person can take all the precautions in the world and still become a victim. No one is to blame for rape but rapists themselves, and if we spend time educating women how to protect themselves, we should spend an equal amount of time (if not more) reaching out to — let's face it, men — about ending violence against women. 

American Experience: The Pill (PBS Special)

In my American History class we had to write a research paper on an invention that has had a substantial impact on American society; it's probably no surprise that I chose to cover the birth control pill. I was going to post my long, tedious (albeit well-written) essay, but then I thought "Hey, why not post the documentary that was the basis for my paper in the first place?" Here you have it folks, the introduction to my research paper (for the heck of it) and the PBS special The Pill:

____________________________________________________________

The birth control pill, or simply “the Pill," is no stranger to controversy. Devised at a time in American history when wholesome values and sexual conservatism reigned supreme, it was pegged by certain religious sectors as “intrinsically wrong,” and effectively divided the nation into two warring states: those who believed the Pill was an unnatural, sacrilegious abomination, and those who believed it was a pivotal step in securing sexual freedom and reproductive rights for millions of women nationwide. 

No consensus was ever reached as Americans continue to bicker over the morality of contraception to this day, but whether the Pill is seen as a one-way ticket to Promiscuityville or a beacon of hope and liberation, it has drastically changed the way our nation thinks about sex, birth control, reproductive rights, and gender roles, and will likely do so for years to come.

Purity Balls: Why is our virginity anybody's business but our own?

When I was a kid (read: younger than I am now), I was deathly afraid of Chucky from the Child’s Play series. You know him, right? He’s got cute little overalls, tousled red hair . . . and a knack for killing people in a variety of strange and gruesome ways. Well, when I was fairly young I made the mistake of watching the first Child’s Play movie with my parents, and up until the age of thirteen or so I was convinced he used to hobble down our hallway in the dead of night. I can even remember being shaken from a deep sleep on more than one occasion, body drenched with sweat, fearing that you-know-who was in the next room over - or worse, my closet - planning the best way to finish me off.

Thankfully, I’ve since gotten over my fear of croaky-voiced, homicidal dolls, but that doesn’t mean I’m fearless. There are still tons of things that make my blood pressure spike - spiders, clowns, and playing Silent Hill alone in the dark, for instance - but there’s one real-world issue that really makes me want to squirm: Purity Balls.

I’d be surprised if this is your first time hearing about Purity Balls. The issue has been beaten to death - both by Christian conservatives who think they’re the keenest thing since toilet paper, and liberals (like myself) who think they’re a huge infringement on the rights of young girls - but if this truly is your first time hearing the (slightly suggestive) term, let me explain:

Purity Balls are pretty much like weddings. They’re held in big, fancy hotels with elegant finger foods, butlers with bad comb-overs, and the occasional stereotypical violinist in the corner; there’s also dancing, performances, pretty gowns, and a whole lot of pleasantries. But instead of a bride and groom coming together to pronounce their love to the world, the fathers and daughters attending these things make vows of their own. In well-rehearsed, cult-like chanting, the daughters promise to stay “pure” (i.e. abstinent) until marriage, and their fathers promise to help protect said purity, while staying pure themselves (i.e. by refraining from looking at pornography). As an added bonus, sometimes the fathers give their daughters purity rings, or more disturbingly, keys (to their virginity) that can be stashed away until their future husbands come along.

You can’t see me, but I’m really biting my lip on this one. I have a lot of amazing Christian friends who’ve made vows to “stay pure,” and I want them to know that I really, really respect their decisions. In fact, I think wanting to save yourself for marriage is extremely commendable - and smart on some levels - but I just can’t get past how Purity Balls take notions of celibacy to the extreme. Here’s my beef:

1) I don’t like that in the Christian view “sex” is seen as the antithesis of “purity” and "righteousness." That makes it sound like all girls (yes, only girls ) who have pre-marital relations are dirty, unwholesome, and unjust - sinful people who should be punished. Whether parents like to admit it or not, this is a new era and kids are "gettin' jiggy with it" much earlier in life. Do I think that's okay? No. But having a hateful you're-going-to-Hell-if-you-do-this attitude isn't going to help anything. We should teach kids the truth about sex and its consequences, not automatically slap "I'm Abstinent" stickers on their foreheads.

2) It kind of freaks me out that girls as young as ten (and in some cases, way younger) are attending these things. Girls that young haven’t even experienced puberty - or any of the sexual urges that go along with it - so how could they fully understand the concept of abstinence (or sex, for that matter)? Their parents are making decisions for them before they’ve lived long enough to understand their situation.

3) These dads aren't giving their "little darlings" enough credit. If you watch a lot of the videos and documentaries on this subject, you'll see that most of the fathers have very skewed ideas of what it means to be a "little girl." They basically think that all young women are self-conscious until their fathers step in and tell them how beautiful they are - one man was even quoted saying “females were created to feel accepted by men,” and “even though we want to think we’re the same, we are different . . . A woman needs to feel loved and accepted by her father. She was created by God to feel that.” Heck, fathers should compliment their daughters (and sons). But not because we're delicate little things that need constant reassurance, but because that's what family does. (And another thing, what's with all the emphasis on "beauty"? I don't know about you, but I'd rather be praised for my smarts or kick-butt nunchuck skills . . . )

4) Last time I checked, I’m not carrying a club or wearing a leopard-skin loin cloth. So that must mean we’re past the age where “fathers own their daughters until they can be passed onto a husband.” But that’s exactly what’s going on here! These fathers are assuming that their daughters are too "emotional" and "irrational" to make their own decisions, so they have to "take control" until another man comes along to take care of them. Is that a huge insult or what?

6) Purity Balls exclusively promote "heteronormativity." I can't imagine a bi- or homosexual girl walking in with confidence to one of those things, and that is discrimination.

7) Purity Balls are sexist and promote a ridiculous double-standard. They’re meant for fathers and their daughters - because it’s crucial that we protect girls’ virginities at all costs. But what about young boys? Why aren’t people spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to make sure their sons stay pure until marriage? Well, this is going to blow your mind, but there are balls for sons and their mothers. But instead of promoting purity for themselves, the boys are told to “refrain from soiling girls' virginities."

Here's a barf-bag. You might need it.

I guess I just don’t understand why our virginity has to be anybody’s business but our own, or why (as women) it’s completely tied to our worth as people. It’s a horrible double-standard that’s almost completely irrelevant in this day and age. On a side note, I don’t think I give my own dad enough credit because, now that I think about it, he would never even consider taking me to one of those horrid Purity Balls. He doesn't own a tux.

Hah, but seriously, he knows that I’m smart enough to make my own decisions about what’s right for me and my life, and he trusts me - no questions asked. If you've got a dad (or a mom, or a step-parent, or a crazy Uncle Jimmy) in your life that trusts you like that, run out and give them a hug right now!

___________________________

If you're interested in reading more about this topic check out Jessica Valenti's The Purity Myth! I haven't read it yet myself, but it's highly-acclaimed in the feminist universe:

The United States is obsessed with virginity -- from the media to schools to government agencies. In The Purity Myth Jessica Valenti argues that the country's intense focus on chastity is damaging to young women. Through in-depth cultural and social analysis, Valenti reveals that powerful messaging on both extremes -- ranging from abstinence curriculum to "Girls Gone Wild" infomercials -- place a young woman's worth entirely on her sexuality. Morals are therefore linked purely to sexual behavior, rather than values like honesty, kindness, and altruism. Valenti sheds light on the value -- and hypocrisy -- around the notion that girls remain virgin until they're married by putting into context the historical question of purity, modern abstinence-only education, pornography, and public punishments for those who dare to have sex. The Purity Myth presents a revolutionary argument that girls and women are overly valued for their sexuality, as well as solutions for a future without a damaging emphasis on virginity.

I also like Purity Balls: Protecting Girls From Making Choices, an article by Tracie Egan Morrissey featured on Jezebel:

"...But ultimately, what's most troubling about purity balls and such pledges is that the parents are always talking about how there are "terrible consequences" to making "certain" (read: sexy choices. And while that can be true, why is the solution then to discourage their daughters from making any choices at all? I admit that I'm approaching the topic with my own biases — about sex and religion and people who parent their children with a "do what I say, not what I've done" philosophy — but it's clear from this clip that this 11-year-old girl has no idea about what dating in the 21st century is like, and it's scary to think that there's a chance she never will."