Deanna Ogle examines Georgia Democrats’ attempt to ban vasectomies.
Over the last several months women’s reproductive health rights and have been attacked, but women are not allowing these rights to be infringed upon without a fight. Last week they walked out in protest of a congressional hearing about contraception completely comprised of men, voiced so much disapproval when Komen pulled their Planned Parenthood funding that the decision was reversed almost overnight, and the bill in Virginia requiring women to be forcefully probed before an abortion was slowed to a halt when women came out against the unnecessary and deplorable legislation.
But when it comes to the birth control conversation, Robert Walker of the Huffington Post asks, where are the men?
The conversation surrounding reproductive health have only been made worse by sound bites from people who still hold a 1950’s women-are -responsible-for-birth-control attitude and lop-sided logic. For example, when the Catholic church said that Viagra, which is currently covered for men on staff, solves a medical problem and that contraception does not, Jon Stewart of “The Daily Show” responded with: “So the Catholic Church says that a boner is a need, but not getting pregnant is … more of a want.”
If men’s reproductive rights were being threatened as equally as women’s, would men be more likely to be involved?
Robert Walker thinks so. “If legislatures were requiring colorectal exams for no good medical reason, banning Viagra, outlawing condoms and vasectomies, and otherwise messing with the private parts and reproductive health of men, you better believe that men would be doing more than waiting for a Gallup pollster to ring them up,” he says.
A group of Georgia Democrats are doing just that in order to bring attention to the unfair biases and wake up the masculine base that has been absent from the fight thus far. They proposed HB 954 which would bar men from being able to get vasectomies. According to the proponents, this bill is specifically designed to show the faulty logic in the legislators’ anti-contraception approach and to encourage men to take a more active stance in the conversation.
Joseph Tash of The University of Kansas and his team of reproductive biologists are working on another way for men to take charge of the birth control issue. Tash and his team have created a birth control pill for men. The pill contains a chemical compound called H2-gamendazole that prevents sperm from developing. Tash says that men will be able to take the pill, and when they go off of it will be able to regain full fertility within a matter of weeks.
Fifty years after the advent of the contraceptive pill for woman, men will soon be able shift the responsibility of birth control that has largely been left to women back into their own hands.
“Unless [women] want to keep fighting — and losing — these battles forever, it’s time to enlist a few good men in their cause,” concludes Walker.
Have you been speaking up and we just have been missing your voice? Do you think that you as men can’t help win the fight so you have left their thoughts off the table? If approved by the FDA, would you take Tash’s gamendolze pill?
Photo credit: Flickr/Gnarls Monkey
I will agree to the idea of faith-based organizations exempting themselves from any and all services they don’t wish to cover the moment they agree to pay taxes at the same rate as other businesses do. As it stands, I am paying extra taxes on my small business to cover the gap in government funding caused by all the churches and faith-based hospitals that pay not one dime. The real hypocrisy, as I see it, is religious institutions refusing to bankroll activities they ideologically oppose while forcing taxpayers to bankroll them, whether we support them or oppose them. Christians talk… Read more »
If you guys are so butthurt over not having your reproductive needs covered, do something about it! Women have fought for years and years to get insurance companies to provide these services. You want them, you fight for them. This comment: “one thing that is consistently missed is that the catholic church’s health care plan doesn’t cover vasectomies either. No one is up in arms over that. Pure freaking hypocrisy on the part of people like John Stewart.” That makes no sense to me. Women are up in arms over it because we fight for that kind of thing. Guys… Read more »
I personally don’t think employers should be obligated by law to provide a standard set of benefits. We do not obligate them to provide a standard pension or 401K match. We don’t obligate them to pay the same or offer the exact same schedules. Why the hell should we expect them to provide the same standard set of health benefits? Heck, we are ok with letting them provide different levels of coverage for things like vaccinations and emergency room visits! Who thinks birth control pills are more important than vaccinations or emergency room visits? My insurance doesnt cover every procedure… Read more »
Isn’t it in the best interests of both men and women to fight for men and women’s reproductive health? Did you, or these women in question, fight for women AND men?
Proposing legislation as a way to point out a double standard can be a little risky. I would hate for this to backfire, i.e., the Georgia legislature passes the bill even though it was meant to be ironic. This happens sometimes in legislatures, something passes that was never intended to pass but gets its own momentum and passes anyway. Or, people insert things into a bill to kill the bill but then it becomes law anyway.
Please be careful, Georgia legislators.
Oh, likely it will pass. And then everyone will be like ‘WTF? Men were supposed to be jumping all over this and stopping it, why didn’t they?’ But the whole issue will fade away as people remember ‘well, if men didn’t protect themselves it’s their own damn fault anyway because they have the power to unlike women and maybe we should make men buying condoms illegal to prove that men are more willing to protect their rights then women.’ Of course the very nature of the male identity is to not have a male identity, is to deny maleness in… Read more »
If that happens there will be a major anger around men and women’s health, feminism will probably take a reputation hit since it’s talked about by quite a few feminists and some may associate the bill with feminism. If it passed I’d want the proposer to be fired instantly for careless actions. If you need to propose risky bills that can harm men, or women, to point out a double standard then maybe you need to look at other methods of awareness or have a way to set it up as a dummy bill that has no option of passing… Read more »
Framing this question as one of “reproductive rights” in some ways misses the mark. This is about religious beliefs, or, more precisely, a clash of religious beliefs (even if with atheistic, secular beliefs). As Mike astutely pointed out, for those in some religious camps, there can be no compromise. This clash of the fundamentalist approach to religion with the humanistic, secular approach that politics in the modern world seems to demand, may well prove to be as divisive, protracted, and bitter as the slavery issue was in the decades leading up to the American Civil war. Those who cannot or… Read more »
Ever cross your mind that religious people can and do have sex for purposes other than reproduction or that religious people educate their children about sex? As a religious person I personally don’t give a rip what you do in your personal life (provided you do not infringe upon mine). I really do not think it is the Government’s business to mandate that a religious institution pay for (indirectly through insurance) things that run counter to its core teachings. Aside- I do not think the government has any place to regulate marriage either. If you want birth control as a… Read more »
“The Church tends to be more selective and pay less than other employers. If you work there you are doing it by choice.” Uh, not if it’s the only job you can find. And what do you do if you are working there for years and then discover you have a problem with your uterus that requires hormonal birth control as a treatment and your insurance doesn’t cover it? Just up and switch jobs? I think you are assuming that job searching and switching jobs is easier than it is, especially for people who are already poor and don’t have… Read more »
Different employers have different plans. My wife’s employer has cheaper insurance than mine and it covers things mine does not. Why do people think they are owed a certain kind of benefits?
I am aware that different employers have different plans. That is beneficial if you are married to a person who is not only employed full-time, but also employed somewhere besides where you work. “Why do people think they are owed a certain kind of benefits?” I would expect a certain standard of coverage from an insurance company. Namely, preventative care. Why do I expect such? Because it is common sense that an insurance company would cover preventative care so as not to incur further costs later in the insured life. Clearly you do not agree with Obama’s healthcare initiative. I… Read more »
An aside- If you can show me one instance where the Catholic Church is the sole (or the employer of choice) in an MSA I will eat my hat.
This is a particularly tasteless move by a group that is completely unconcerned with partisanship in this country. The problem here is a clear failure on the part of the left to genuinely listen to people on the right. I am not against abortion, however, I was also raised by Christian conservatives, and I have been exposed nonstop to their views for the 2.5 decades that I have thus far spent on this planet. What they have been clear on, from day 1, is a genuine belief that abortion is murder. I have yet to hear a single member of… Read more »
Personally, I’d love to see free, safe, reversible sterilization made available to all Americans so that religious folks would never have to worry about “abortion holocausts” in the first place. But wouldn’t you know it, a lot of those same highly religious folks seem staunchly opposed to any form of birth control too! (Even something as simple and harmless as condoms.) It’s quite an interesting coincidence.
You made an excellent point regarding the discussion around abortion. I too have a conservative christian background. But, as a scientist, I have always found it difficult to discuss this issue in purely religious terms. Whether or not a person believes that abortion is murder usually is determined by whether or not they feel that a soul exists in utero or at conception. Scientifically, this can’t be addressed. Religiously, well, it depends on the religion, doesn’t it? This becomes an extremely tricky discussion. Science can’t give you the answer to when a soul becomes part of living tissue. But, religion… Read more »
one thing that is consistently missed is that the catholic church’s health care plan doesn’t cover vasectomies either. No one is up in arms over that. Pure freaking hypocrisy on the part of people like John Stewart.
This whole discussion has made me think ALOT about the ways we treat men / women are reproduction. A little thought popped into my head. Oppression: Can there be anything more oppressive than not allowing a person to have total control over their biological destiny. When it comes to abortion , feminists seem to think so, it is their watershed talking point. Abortion is the end all to be all of the ‘patriarchy’ and its goal to control women thru reproduction. But, right now in western society at least, women have ALL the options and men have NONE. Some would… Read more »
Well, also condoms, don’t forget condoms, they are very important.
But I don’t think anyone would argue that men need more contraception choices. I would suggest all of you divert your efforts to showing support for a male birth control pill. People have been trying to develop one, but it has been slow going because it is perceived to be not necessary, with the million types of contraception for women. So if you all get your voices out there and say, yes, we want male birth control, maybe it will help them realize there is a market for it.
That is a great point, actually. Hadn’t thought about it like that…
I’ve read where women take the used condom and impregnate themselves with it.
Gotta FLUSH that thing to protect yourselves, guys!!!
When men get reproductive rights and when those are threatened then perhaps we will stand up, right now we have no rights to protect. The most basic right (IMHO) when it come to procreation is the right to say NO and to have that right respected by all areas of society and most especially the LAW FACT: Men can’t say NO If a man says NO and a woman is able to obtain his sperm thru ANY method, he is still responsible for the child that results. Now think about that for a second. If a woman says NO and… Read more »
I’m puzzled by this. Is there a problem out there with women obtaining men’s sperm through a method other than getting them to have an orgasm? To be clear: this is an actual question, not a snarky assertion that the problem doesn’t exist disguised as a question. A second thing: Many, many of the specifically female health care needs mentioned above are cost-neutral for health plans. You’re providing coverage for a women, its economically rational to provide contraception and a lot of other preventive services because one complicated pregnancy costs the insurer more than providing all those services to several… Read more »
“I’m puzzled by this. Is there a problem out there with women obtaining men’s sperm through a method other than getting them to have an orgasm?”
Are you saying that having an orgasm is consent to parenthood?
Not even that, all it takes is an ejaculation (which don’t always accompany orgasms after all)
You heard it here, orgasms are consent!
Men have had semen removed while unconscious and are responsible for the children, men have had semen removed from used condoms and are responsible for the children. As for the second thing, how is getting women to quit smoking more “cost neutral” than getting men to quit smoking, or how are condoms, which are generally cheaper and has the bonus cost of reducing the risk of STI’s more cost effective than birth control pills or shots?
Oh, i forgot to mention rape, if a woman has sex, even non-consensual sex with a man even if he is underage he is still responsible for the child brought into this world.
“You heard it here, orgasms are consent!”
Wow, no, Amaranth did not say that, they were asking if there were any OTHER methods possible. If the sperm was obtained via orgasm without consent that would imply rape. So this: “If a man says NO and a woman is able to obtain his sperm thru ANY method, he is still responsible for the child that results.” would be incorrect because he was raped and he could charge the woman with rape. I would be very surprised if that was still required for him to be responsible for a child.
No, Amaranth simply implied that there was no way a woman could obtain sperm without giving consent. Since the response was to “getting sperm after a man says no” pointing out that there is no way to get sperm without an orgasm kinda implies that a man clearly said yes by having said orgasm. This would be much the same as telling a woman she needs to be responsible for a child because she was involved in the sex that conceived it, something that would be unthinkable. The problem in that even under the new definition that “includes” men by… Read more »
Oh my god, I remember reading about that story, that was messed up. Honestly, the courts are the most backwards system in the world when it comes to rape and to domestic violence, for everyone, so I guess I should not have been surprised. “This would be much the same as telling a woman she needs to be responsible for a child because she was involved in the sex that conceived it, something that would be unthinkable.” Except anti-abortionists do think that, frequently. So…. Our country is very backwards, I’m sure we can agree on that. “No, Amaranth simply implied… Read more »
The problem is that there is at least some form of debate when it comes to abortion, there is virtually zero debate and almost no knowledge that a male, even underage, drugged and forcibly raped is forced to pay for it. and NOONE in the republican party would tell you that a mother needs to be fully responsible for a child up until 18 after rape, a small group would say abortion is wrong under those circumstances, that is it. While the current democratic party is showing extreme anti male bias. The VAWA fought to remove a mans right to… Read more »
I am not interested in getting into a debate about other issues that come up on GMP all the time. What I was doing was clarifying what Amaranth said. She was suggesting that orgasm = consent.
I will assume that has been sufficiently clarified for you.
You raise a good point. You don’t get a say whether or not you have to pay for child support, whether or not you’d like to keep the child, or, in most cases, get custody. That alone deserves to get talked about.
(Your comment was one of the comments of the day yesterday!)
I am a feminist, but I agree with you 100% on this.
Women don’t have a right to get pregnant from some guy, and then FORCE him to pay for it.
As long as there’s abortion, she has no moral right to do that. IF she wants the baby, she can raise it HERSELF.
“If men’s reproductive rights were being threatened as equally as women’s….”
If?
Men’s reproductive rights are already nearly non-existent, and men know it. Our reaction has been to drop out of relationships and marriage and fatherhood, because we know we don’t have a voice in this arena.
Feminists like to quote and talk to each other endlessly, which is why they get into this mess. So, here is the exact text from the Obamacare legislation that describes those services that (i) must be offered by all providers and (ii) must be free of cost or co-pay requirement: ——————- (a) IN GENERAL — A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage shall, at a minimum provide coverage for and shall not impose any cost sharing requirements for — (1) evidence based items or services that have in effect a rating… Read more »
Prostate health isn’t covered in the bill?! Are you sure?
Female smoking cessation – in the case of pregnancy or in general? But not males?
is this surprising to you?
I am sure. I searched for the word “man”, and it appears only one time (compared to 134 occurrences of the word “woman”). Also, the part of the bill that lists required no-copay coverage is short (only 5 items), and I checked all five. Virtually all female specific health care is no-copay. All male health care allows for a co-pay.
And this is under Obamacare’s proposals? Currently I do pay co-pays.
Is this a cost issue? Figuring that they can’t cover all flat out no copay so they pay for the gender that conceives? That’s the only logic I can think of, though its unfair completely.
Men’s healthcare is as important as women’s.
You men need to get together and scream bloody murder at Obama for this injustice.
Democrats are wasting my $$ and yours trying this trick with banning vasectomies.
Anthony, I’m curious, did you also try “man” and “male” as well?
Actually there are a lot of things entirely unrelated to sex that are left out of reach of men under obamacare including things like cardiovascular health. Hell the same vaccine used to prevent cervical cancer in women all over the world is denied to me in most first world countries despite the fact that it can prevent oral anal and penile cancers. The government simply has no interest in mens health.
FYI BRex, I do believe that you can get the HPV vaccine (that’s what you’re referring too?). The CDC just did not recommend it as mandatory of boys because targeting one gender is less cost for the same result: if the majority of women are vaccinated and heterosexual men can only get HPV from sexual contact with women, then men would also not be infected with HPV as it would be eradicated from the female population.
It’s a difference of mandating versus suggesting.
Actually there is this thing called homosexuality, whereby men have sex with other men, this allows the HPV virus to be spread from a man to another man, the other issue with herd immunity is that not all women get the HPV vaccine, meaning one individual womans choice can endanger any woman she chooses to have sex with. It is based on unsound science. Many jurisdictions in the states will not give the HPV vaccine to men outright, as is the case in other countries such as Canada. Others will do so for a fee of several hundred dollars as… Read more »
“Many jurisdictions in the states will not give the HPV vaccine to men outright, as is the case in other countries such as Canada. Others will do so for a fee of several hundred dollars as is the case in most other countries such as Great Britain and most of the rest of Europe.” I was unaware of that, it does not make any logical sense to me, but I guess I should have expected that from government. “Actually there is this thing called homosexuality, whereby men have sex with other men, this allows the HPV virus to be spread… Read more »
Don’t worry! Recent evidence shows that the anti-HPV vaccine may also be 100% preventative for many other cancers, including huge killers like lung cancer. People who have the HPV vaccine may turn out to be virtually immune to many of the deadliest and most common cancers. This drug is looking the most important health care innovation since penicillin. It will be available to everyone, very soon. Meanwhile, get your boys vaccinated (insurance won’t cover it, but you can pay yourself). I have. This must be done very early, before age 12 (in my opinion). Once HPV gets in the body,… Read more »
There are insurance companies covering Gardasil for boys and men, more all the time. It’s also available (sometimes free, depending) through Planned Parenthood.
Isn’t there a bill going through right now in the US that is allowing companies to choose whether their insurance will cover the pill for women? Does that not mean that a vast majority of religious institutions, of which there are many in the US to my knowledge, will take advantage of this? And if the answers to these two questions is yes, then how are women’s rights being COMPLETELY covered?
And what exactly do you mean by female violence prevention?
Faulty logic all around. Under Obamacare: Vasectomy is a patient responsibility: insurance may refuse to cover, or charge a copay. Tubal ligation, along with all other female health care needs, is guaranteed and free. Republicans are proposing that women should PAY for their health care needs — like men are already required to pay for our health care needs under Obamacare. They are not attempting to outlaw or ban any procedure. They want women to pay for a SMALL NUMBER of their own gender specific healthcare costs. The same way men are required to pay for ALL of our gender… Read more »
Anthony Zarat: “Vasectomy is a patient responsibility: insurance may refuse to cover, or charge a copay.
Tubal ligation, along with all other female health care needs, is guaranteed and free.”
Do you have the specific language on this? Is this explicit in the bill?
-Jut
See following message. The exact text that requires virtually all female needs to be free of cost, while not paying for any (zero, none) male needs, is spread throughout the document. However, the critical sentence is “… at a minimum provide coverage for and shall not impose any cost sharing requirements for …” followed by ” … with respect to women, such additional preventive care and screenings not described … ” and ” … regarding breast cancer screening, mammography, and prevention shall be considered the most current …” The act pays for a large number of female health care needs,… Read more »
Odd, if true. I think women want men to get vasectomies more than men want to get them. Seems to me that vasectomies may be in women’s interest even more than men’s interest, so a truly women-centered approach would cover vasectomies as well. (One of those “your balls are mine” kind of things.)
Where do I start? Here, go read this, then come back and comment in an informed manner: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Male_privilege
Why don’t you start without the snark. His comments seemd pretty informed to me. If you have something you disagree with state that.
Basically your post is saying your male, shut up.
“where are the men?”
“SHUT UP AND GO READ ABOUT MALE PRIVILEGE YOU HORRIBLE MALE”
Asked and answered.
Um, where are men required to be raped as a condition for their medical care? That’s what the Virginia bill was proposing. I don’t think that was a case of women being treated the same as men. Am I wrong? Also, I think that’s a pretty good reason to complain.
Even when men _are_ raped they don’t get free medical care. And they get no say over any conception that’s the result of them having been raped.
What are you comparing the situation of women too? What you imagine the situation of men is?
Do you agree with me that men are not required to submit to rape as a condition of receiving the medical care they choose?
Kirsten,
They don’t receive free medical care for their specific reproductive issues regardless of whether or not they’re raped. Nor do they receive legal protections from being forced to assume parental responsibilities from children conceived via rape _in which they were the victim._
So, yeah, men don’t have to ‘submit to rape to receive free health care for their reproductive issues’ because raped men don’t get free health care because they were raped.
If the situation was the same for women, there would be no exemption for rape victims!
Surely preventing an unwanted pregnancy is important to everyone who practices cross-fertile sex, not just women? My IUD benefits my husband every bit as much as it does me. If he had a vasectomy, that would benefit me as much as him. I don’t see what the deal is with calling contraception a benefit for women only in anything but a technical, record-keeping kind of sense (the main types currently available by prescription must be implemented by women, so of course it’s on their medical records, covered by their insurance, etc.). If men weren’t involved, contraception wouldn’t be necessary, eh?… Read more »