save the children . . .

. . . from the media. Recently there has been an uproar in the media over Chaz Bono being on Dancing with the Stars. The problem? A transgender person where our children can see him! Or her! “We’re so confused–our children won’t know which gender-specific pronoun to use!” Frankly, I think it’s wonderful that people, young and old,  watching the popular show will have to confront their biases and prejudices against trans folk. Chaz has my vote.

Here’s Lewis Black’s onslaught of hilarity against the media’s irrational fear-mongering against Bono. 


fauxminism . . .

Fauxminism: Fake feminism; calling oneself a feminist while behaving and/or supporting ideas or expectations working against the general basis of feminism.

Check out this article from early July about men and fauxminism

brought to my attention by a rad male feminist friend. What do you think about fauxminism? Have you experienced fauxminism at work?

from tumblr_lbwpvo6PJt1qekcz0o1_500

bad move Des Moines Register . . .

Apparently I’m a little late on this Des Moines Register editorial stating the Institute of Medicine’s recommendation that insurers cover preventative health services for women goes “too far.”

Excuse me, that’s bullshit.

The argument behind this naïve and short-sighted stance is that Americans in general overuse health care, and if people don’t have to pay things like deductibles or co-pays then they don’t “think twice about the expense.” Which is actually kind of ironic phrasing, considering this writer must not have thought twice—or once—about the cost of preventative measures (birth control, yearly exams) versus the cost of unintended/ unplanned pregnancies, or sexually transmitted infections.

“This is exactly why co-payments and deductibles are necessary in health insurance. They help to prevent the overuse of care, something Americans are globally notorious for.”

How you gonna overuse birth control? Hmmm? OD on the 4th week sugar pills?

Placing the burden of disorderly spending on the shoulders of women, especially low income women, is not the way to break Americans from their “drug habit.” This will just mean a continuance of unintended pregnancies of which the parents aren’t financially ready for (because if it’s hard to afford the cost of birth control it might be harder to afford the cost of a child). Not to mention the services that child will need, most likely to be paid for (at least in part) by social and governmental services—aka tax money. It also means covering the cost of women’s medical needs that could have been prevented or detected and treated earlier (cervical or breast cancer), as well as the cost of treating STIs.

If the Register is truly concerned with our country’s dependence on prescription drugs then it needs to go after the pharmaceutical companies that exploit patients into thinking they need useless drugs. (Sexual female dysfunction anyone?!) Keeping women from preventative health measures is really what will cost you in the long run.

word of the day: invidious

Invidious- calculated to create ill will or resentment or give offense; offensively or unfairly discriminating.

*See: North Dakota.

A recent North Dakota law bans the use of medication abortions, which are safe, common, and FDA approved prescription drugs used to administer abortions within the first trimester.

In plain terms, North Dakota took away the only alternative to surgical abortions. In the first trimester. Which is illegal. And quite possibly violates the doctor’s right (and duty) to practice medicine according to the highest standards of medical practice.

Thankfully, a state judge issued a restraining order today on the law, stating it posed new and unnecessary restrictions. The Center for Reproductive Rights filed the lawsuit this past Monday.

“The Center’s lawsuit, filed on behalf of Red River Women’s Clinic, the only abortion facility in North Dakota, argues that the law takes away an option widely recognized as safe and effective by the World Health Organization, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and other medical experts and professional organizations—needlessly forcing women seeking an abortion to undergo surgery even when such a procedure may be medically inadvisable.


“… The law attempts to restrict medication abortion strictly to the regimen on FDA-approved labels, despite the fact that that regimen is outdated and inconsistent with medical advances with medication abortion made in the last decade.”