Joanna Schroeder wonders what we’re saying about men when we think a sex strike is the most effective means to changing legislation.
According to Alter Net, a group called Liberal Ladies Who Lunch have organized a sex strike, set to happen April 28-May 5, Lysistrata-style. The LLWL area addressing not only the coverage of birth control by insurance, but also new laws that limit women’s reproductive rights even further.
In the original Greek play, the women of two warring communities organized a sex strike to compel their men to put a stop to their endless killing.
In some ways, the LLWL strike makes more sense than the original—if we’re not going to be afforded the same prescription coverage for birth control that you guys are given for Viagra or Cialis, then why would we have sex with you guys and risk pregnancy?
Except… Is my not having sex with my beloved husband actually going to help us get anywhere on this issue? My husband agrees with me, birth control should be covered by insurance. Why does he have to go without sex because Rick Santorum and his bring-religion-into-government buddies are legislating things like allowing doctors to lie to their pregnant patients about birth defects in an unborn baby.
Even further into the issue, what are we saying about men when we think the most powerful way to be heard is to block you guys from access to our ladyparts? Are you all just puppy dogs panting over panties?
And what are we saying about women’s role in our society and government when the way we change votes on the legislative floors of America is by using our vaginas as leverage?
I leave it to you guys: Will this sex strike work? Would you change your mind or become politically active if sex were on the line?
And what are we saying about the roles of men and women in our society by going all ancient-Greece on this issue?