Image Map

Misogynists aka Woman Haters

05 March 2012


Have y'all noticed that things are looking a little more ho-fessional around these parts? {And, no, I cannot resist using Ludacris's made up words every chance I get.}  That would be thanks to Becca at Jumping Jax Designs.  She's so popular I had to wait almost 4 weeks to get my blog makeover.  But alas, good things are worth waiting for.  Thanks, Becca, for the bloggy beautification.

Now, I'm about to break one of the big rules in the Blogger Rulebook.  I actually don't own a Blogger Rulebook, but if I did, I bet it would have a big, fat, bolded, rule like this:

For the love of all things Holy, don't blog about politics, you imbecile!  What are you trying to do?  Lose readers, be divisive, and start a comment war on your blog?!?!

Well, maybe I am trying to lose readers, be divisive, and start a comment war.  Or perhaps I think this issue is important enough that I should take a public stand.  Yeah, let's go with the latter.

The issue I'm about to discuss is Rush Limbaugh's misogynistic rant.  If you aren't up to speed on it yet, here's the quick and dirty.  Sandra Fluke, a law student from Georgetown testified to Congress regarding to new health regulation around free contraceptives.  You can read exactly what she said here.


Rush Limbaugh's response:  
"What does it say about the college co-ed Sandra Fluke, who goes before a congressional committee and essentially says that she must be paid to have sex? What does that make her?"

"It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute."

"She wants to be paid to have sex," Limbaugh continued on his radio program. "She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception."  {source}

In my opinion, Rush is a bigot, a racist, and a misogynist and he says inflammatory things on purpose to get a rise out of people.  I certainly wouldn't take on the challenge of fighting crazy with logic.  In fact, I honestly didn't think that real people out there bought into this hyper-exaggerated craziness.  However, it was brought to my attention today, by another blogger, that there are people who are at least willing to entertain Rush's argument.

I was already planning on writing some version of this post, but now I'd like to take a step back and give a hypothetical rebuttal.


Argument #1: She is asking for someone to pay for her to have sex.  So that is considered a form of prostitution.
My response: No, she's not asking for money to have sex.  In fact, she doesn't mention anything about her own sex life.  Nor is she receiving any money through this legislation.  She is appreciative of the fact that her health insurance plan will now pay for a prescription medication prescribed by her doctor.  *Gasp* Asking for health insurance to cover a medication that she and her doctor have decided she needs?  Sounds pretty reasonable to me.  

My health insurance pays for my birth control.  Does that make me a prostitute?  Apparently, according to Rush.  I'm a married woman, who has sex with my husband, but isn't yet ready for children.  Might as well put me on a street corner.  

To add insult to injury, it was another woman who was debating this side of the argument.  Why we as women are so willing to call another woman a slut, I will never understand.  If we left birth control up to men, we'd all really be in trouble.  What I see when I watch the video of Sandra Fluke is a video of a young, conscientious woman who has seen the detrimental effects of a health insurance plan that doesn't offer contraceptives.  


Argument #2: These students attended a university that doesn't believe in contraception.  How can you ask them to fund something they don't believe in?
My response: Religious belief should not be a consideration at the provider level.  If a woman and her doctor believe this medication is needed, the provider should cover it.  Sandra Fluke gives an example of a woman who was taking birth control for ovarian cysts.  Without the coverage, she ended up in the Emergency Room {which is a visit, I might add, that the insurance company had to pay for.}  So where do you draw the line?  Is birth control okay for some women and not for others?  What if a sexually promiscuous man gets an STD and has to take steroids for treatment?  Will this religious university's health care cover that?  

To me, that line of thinking is the equivalent of the following hypothetical.  A guy gets angry and punches a wall.  He breaks his hand and goes to the doctor.  The insurance company {provided by a religious institution that doesn't condone violence} won't pay for it.  "We don't believe in violence," they say, "so you'll have to suffer with a broken hand or pay for it yourself."  It's like trying to fight the effect instead of the cause.  

So you don't want women having sex unless it's for the purpose of bearing children?  Okay, fair enough.  I might not agree with that, but to each his own.  Educate the students all you want on the benefits of only having sex for child bearing.  But to refuse health insurance coverage for contraceptives only makes it worse.  I haven't heard any church come forward and say that they support the premise of having children that you don't want, when you aren't ready {within or outside of wedlock.}  Yet, that is the end-game of these policies.  


Argument #3: They can purchase insurance from another source if they want contraceptives to be covered.
My response: If we didn't have a f*#&'ed up insurance system in the United States that won't offer insurance to people for a battery of reasons including pre-existing conditions, then fair enough.  However, getting insurance through your university is a low cost, best access approach.  It's the same reason that 90% of us get insurance through our employers.  We get the best rates and we aren't turned away.  To make this argument is to say that it's okay for someone to have to pay literally hundreds of dollars extra each month for contraceptives.  It makes no sense.  We're talking about college students for one, and secondly, many birth controls are generic and wouldn't even cost that much to pay for in full.  

I'd prefer it if our country didn't get to a point where we are selecting insurance plans based on religious beliefs.  "Um, yes, hi, I'll take the Scientology insurance plan please.  I don't have any children with autism--thank goodness-since they don't believe in that...so I'm all set.  Whenever my engrams are out of whack, I know my insurance will pay to hook me up to an E-meter for some auditing."

At any rate, I contacted ProFlowers, who advertises with Rush Limbaugh.  Hit 'em where it hurts, right?


Today, ProFlowers announced that they are suspending their advertising program with the Rush Limbaugh show.  {I'm not sure if suspending is the same thing as completely dropping him, but it's a step in the right direction.}

If you stuck with me through this entire post, you're a rockstar and I love you.  And if your next move is to click "unfollow", then I take it all back.  I keed, I keed.  Ultimately, this blog is a reflection of my thoughts and beliefs, of who I am.  And you can ask my husband, I've been known to get pretty worked up and outspoken over these types of things.  

Whether you agree or disagree....let me hear it!  We all benefit from the free exchange of ideas.

14 comments:

  1. wow. I don't keep up on the news these days, but this is sort of crazy. I'm not sure what to say except I'm glad I can walk over to drugstore & buy BC over the counter here. Maybe I should start a trading company: BC for Starbucks (or cadbury).

    seriously, great points though.. love that you are passionate about it!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Preach it girl! Honestly, I got SO worked up over the same issue. Ultimately, he enjoys stirring the pot and causing an uproar. It's unfortunate for him that he has to reveal his limited intelligence in order to do so!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Obviously very one knows rush says things to get a rise out of people. I just don't see why this is enough to force sponsors to step back. I think your points really hangin the balance of how people feel about birth control. Many many people including Catholics in question (which I am not) believe birth control to be a form of abortion since it prevents fertilized eggs from implanting. Not paying for abortion is not the same as the "not condoning violence" example. I don't think that's a man or woman issue where all is women need to stil together, or anything. She IS asking for monitory compensation. Literally. She does have the option to not attend or work at a school or buisiness that WILL pay for her bc. Like you mentioned you do. That is absolutely her choice as is purchasing her own insurance. I think the MAIN problem is that the govt has decided that separation of church and state exists only to protect the rights of the state and not of the church. This is an outwardly religious institution being forced to pay women to use contraceptive methods they consider abortion (hello... Condoms anyone?). I see your scientology point and I would suggest that if your chik was, say, autistic then maybe you shouldn't choose to attend a Scientology university or work at a Scientology run buisiness. That certainly doesnt make me a bigot or a misogynost-- that makes me someone who holds a different view on birth control and whether or it is something that is NECESSARY and not elective. we can all agree that birth control I prevent pregnancy is absolutely elective and this religious institutions should not be forced to fund it.

    ReplyDelete
  4. My husband and I were just talking yesterday about how I should never, ever, discuss politics on my blog. BUT this is awesome - I am proud of you for voicing your opinion. Though I don't follow US politics too much - I can agree with the points you made. I am actually interested now - so I am going to read more about it. Keep fighting the good fight - or whatever.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Whoooo girlie I'm glad you have the kahonays to talk about this kind of stuff. LOTS of people dont/wont.

    ReplyDelete
  6. oh girl. i stuck with you through the whole thing.

    it was so well written and direct. i friggin loved it. way to take a stand.

    of course, i agree with you!! i'm a married woman of almost 7 years but only at the age of 26. there's NO WAY i am ready for children. so whats my next alternative? birth control. and, mine's never been covered. that's because i have a shotty health insurance. it's funny that everyone gets worked up over the cost of contraceptives for the health insurance to pay, but does the insurance think about all the expense of unwanted pregnancies? all the maternity insurance out-fee? it cost nearly 20,000 to have a baby these days, and the insurance covers most of it. not to mention medications prescribed for STD's and other sexually related issues. THINK government THINK. is refusing the covering of $30/month for birth control pills worth all the other costs?

    arg.

    ReplyDelete
  7. This was a bold post that I appreciate and applaud. And YES. I read the entire post! Ashley is right that views on birth control determine a person's stand on this issue. And I saw the mention of abortion. I'm about to go against the "blog rule" and say that I think abortion is a woman's right. Personal experiences in my life tell me that women who are raped should have the choice to have an abortion. It may be a life, but what kind of life is it going to be? I can only imagine what kind of trauma I would have to endure to have a daily reminder of rape in a human being or what it would be like to be another child in the juvenile dependency system, because my mom didn't want to keep me, because of what I symbolized to her. And who is going to pay for the therapy for such a mother or adopt a foster child to nurture and raise him? The church? I don't think so. There are so many kind teachings in all religions, but unless someone has a tangible, hands-on solution, it just seems too easy to say that someone else will handle it, whether it's a divine being or another person.

    I mean, really, there is just too much to say in one blog comment. And yes. You already know that I feel like politics is the forbidden topic on blogs. But I'm glad you did it!

    ReplyDelete
  8. yes, yes and YES! every point you made was right ont he mark and i am with you 100%!

    and also? your blog looks fantastic!! :)

    ReplyDelete
  9. i like how you laid this out. good job, woman! keep speaking your mind :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. Stuck through!
    Thanks for having courage and insight to voice your opinions. Unfortunately, I'm horrible with keeping up with politics, and that would be the one thing I KNOW I need to improve upon. I can't just sit back and hope things get done and that things are done right. People like you help me move in that direction of understanding what's going on, and I really appreciate it.
    Thanks for being brave =)

    ReplyDelete
  11. Agreed. 100% agreed. Bookmarking this because it sums up my views on it much more concisely than I can myself. Thank you.

    ReplyDelete
  12. First off...THANK YOU for being bold enough to post this, my gosh did it need to be said!

    Secondly, I know that no one wants to talk about Politics but this is our country and it directly affects us so sometimes you have to! If you scared anyone away its because they saw some truth in your post. I am now a proud new follower :).

    And to finish this novel of a post...Rush Limbaugh takes Viagra. And has no children. Obviously something doesn't add up there, don't think he's taking it for reproductive reasons ya know? But insurance sure does cover it!

    ReplyDelete
  13. There's nothing like a man having opinions about what a woman should or should not do with her body, and the gall to publicly call her out on it. For me, that's what it comes down to at the end of the day. BC is an individual choice, so if someone of a particular religion chooses not to use it, whether it is covered by insurance or not, that is their prerogative. In my eyes, that does not mean that they get to decide who does use it, or whose insurance does cover it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hear hear! Power to you for writing this excellent piece. I don't think you should have to be apologetic for it either. It's your blog, so you have freedom of speech on it :) I'm from the UK but we've been following a lot of the campaigns and I gotta say, US politics is well, pretty crazy (and often v. humourous). I have a lot of American friends here who say they're happy to be out of the country right now while it's all going on.

    Great blog! Glad I found you {via jenni twitter} x

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and love!
Every comment makes me smile :)

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...