photo

photo
photo by Sheri Dixon

Saturday, March 17, 2012

To Hell With the Goose- the Gander Needs His Viagra

So some folks think it's a good idea to allow employers- any employers, not just religious institutions- the freedom to ASK their female employees who request prescription coverage for hormones (also known as "the Pill")exactly what they intend to use those hormones for, and if it is, in fact contraception to be allowed to deny coverage because of an employer's real or imagined religious or moral beliefs (also known as "just not wanting to pay for shit").

This is in addition to the "humiliation via probe and ultrasound" bills already in play for any woman seeking a (still legal- sorry) abortion.

Aside from that first paragraph being a hella run-on sentence, all of the above makes me all kind of squidgy for all sorts of reasons.

And I'm not alone.

There are a number of matching tit for tat bills in the works requiring men who want Viagra or Cialis to watch graphic videos of the unfortunate side effects, or to have a digital prostate exam, or undergo cardiac stress tests.

Which is not as (totally) spiteful as it seems- other than the obvious "I want the blue pill as seen on TV and I don't care about the side effects" most guys think, I believe a little "lookit what could happen, Ace" would be a good idea. It would at least stop 'em (hopefully) from thinking "If 1 is good, 3 will be kick-ass!" and landing themselves in the emergency room. As for the prostate/heart exams- yep- both good ideas before chemically stressing the systems involved.

(I personally think that a written report from a man's wife to the effect that no, he really can't get it up along with dates and measurements is in order. If the man isn't married, it's an automatic NO- cuz that would be immoral).

So actually, a little more care and prudence is MORE warranted for guys wanting to get their Viagra on than a woman who frivolously wants her cystic ovaries to stop causing her intense pain or her monthly visitor to stop making her pass out from anemia.

Women are so shallow...

In addition to the above cautions for the menfolk, here's what I think.

I think that if employers are religiously and/or morally against hormones for contraception and against any abortion for any reason they must therefore be super pro-baby and pro-motherhood.

That's great! Because one of the most expensive types of health care coverage is maternity, and one of the biggest stressors on a new mother is maternity leave.

So obviously, those same employers who will deny hormonal contraceptives and abortions will be happily paying 100% of all OBGYN visits, pre-natal visits, the entire hospitalization (vaginal AND c-section deliveries), will be thrilled to pay at least 6 months full maternity leave AND will be offering no-charge in-office child care.

Wait. What?

That hasn't even come up?

Because they're too busy spinning the entire thing to make women look like party animal slutty prostitutes if they need to be on the Pill while insisting that the need for ED drugs is "a physical condition"?

Because the pastors in church are actually saying that contraception is BAD because it's denying the natural order of things (i.e. producing more church members) but Viagra is GOOD because it allows men to (see above about producing more church members)? Never mind that men can, in fact, ejaculate without having an erection- that's "science" and has no place in church.

So women are not allowed to have abortions, or at the very least must undergo humiliation and pain OTHER than what they've already been through to make that decision and will go through the rest of their lives. Gotcha.

Women may not have privacy in the workplace but must announce that they need hormonal medications to THEIR BOSS- whose business that is exactly ZERO percent. Outstanding.

Viagra and Cialis? Covered under most plans, no problem even though that shit is about a gazillion times more expensive than any hormone out there. Perfectly reasonable.

And yet most plans do NOT cover maternity care and haven't for years. One of those "only good business/nothing personal" decisions.

But no one is trying to control women through a dominant patriarchal forcible submission attitude permeating all of society while simultaneously feigning respect for the fairer sex.

Because this is America, and that would be wrong.

2 comments:

  1. I'm beginning to think I woke up from some sweet dream and found myself in this reality...and it's not America. Well said girlfriend!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Is there anyplace left where this is not a nightmare? Maybe we should move to Sweden. Better yet, when are you going to run for office!?!

    ReplyDelete

There was an error in this gadget