Tag Archives: current events

Links We Love: Tuesday Edition


Posted on January 29, 2013 by

woman_reading_newspaperHappy Tuesday, Feronians! Hopefully, it’ll be even better than your Monday.

Today, we’re sharing some awesome stories we’ve found on the internets:

And lastly, but never least: is a Disney-and-princess-free daughter a more empowered one? It’s a very good question.

Have you seen anything interesting in the news lately that you’d like to share?

Free Birth Control for Girls in France


Posted on January 15, 2013 by

a90730861Next year, France is set to provide free birth control for girls aged 15 to 18. They will not need parental approval or notification, but it is not clear to me whether they will need a physical examination. While there was some opposition from a Catholic organization, the new law was not controversial. A member of the opposing organization, CLER, says “the French government would do better to spend the money on more effective sex education in schools rather than on contraception.” But while learning how to prevent pregnancy is important, it isn’t very useful unless you can obtain the tools needed to prevent pregnancy. Because the birth control is free of charge, “French health officials say the new measure will help protect teenagers who are from low-income families, and from families where sexuality is a taboo subject.”

France’s actions are setting an excellent example for what conscientious, evidence-based health-care looks like. Meanwhile, here in the US, we are moving towards free birth control…slowly. Right now, the Affordable Care Act “only applies to people who currently have private health insurance. Even if you have private health insurance, the coverage might not kick in for a few months or a couple of years – it depends on your plan.” It also only covers certain brands and kinds of birth control, and more importantly for young women who are on their parents’ insurance, it does not provide much privacy. Low-income women without insurance and women whose families are not supportive of their choice to use birth control are not likely to have solid access to birth control under our current laws.

I’m happy France is taking action to protect it’s young women from unwanted pregnancy, and I’m looking forward to seeing how the law affects the rate of unwanted pregnancies among teenagers. Hopefully, once insurance-covered birth control becomes common here in the US, our rates will go down and birth control will become less controversial overall.

Safer Sex: Yeah, There’s an App for That


Posted on January 7, 2013 by

Having sex with a new partner always raises the risk of STI’s, and it’s not always comfortable talking about getting tested or whether you have potentially been exposed to something. However, technology is being developed to make “the talk” a lot easier.

An app called MedXCom is designed to let smart phone users check their potential hook-ups for STIs. From inquisitr, the “app encourages its users to seek regular medical check-ups in order to keep the info fresh and up-to-date. When the individual receives a clean bill of health, the doctor can then authorize a status update on MedXCom…Should you test positive for an STD, the app will only tell the other person that you’re currently carrying some sort of disease. The specifics are kept in the dark.”

Basically, if you are about to hook up with another person, you would first open the app and bump your phones together. The app will tell you if your partner is STI-free, or not.  You both must have the app for this to work. You can get more details about the process from the developer here.

There are some downsides to relying on an app to certify your partner is STI-free. First, it requires a smartphone, which not everyone can afford. Second, I’m not computer savvy enough to know how easily something like this could be hacked and made to give false information, but I’m gonna assume it’s a possibility. Third, some STIs like herpes and HPV are not directly tested for unless symptoms are present, so these infections could still be passed from a person with a “clean” reading from the app. Fourth, because there is often a gap in time between infection with an STI and a positive test result, there is a chance the app could classify someone as STI-free when in fact they were just tested too soon. Finally, this app could lead to people having a false sense of security about the safety of their sexual activity, leading to decreased condom use and a subsequent rise in unwanted pregnancies.

Not that I think this app is a bad idea by any means. I believe that if this becomes widely used, it could potentially keep STI rates down. If using this app or one like it becomes standard, and people start asking their partners to use it, downloads of the app will increase which will lead to an increase in STI testing. This would undoubtedly lead to a decrease in preventable and treatable infections that might otherwise go unnoticed.

Would you use an app like this? Would your partner having this app make you feel safer having sex with them?

“Don’t Be That Guy”: Ad Campaign Gets Consent Right


Posted on December 18, 2012 by

Most anti-rape discussion frames the rape prevention as the victim’s responsibility. We’ve all heard that we’re not supposed to walk alone at night, not drink too much, don’t wear this or that, etc. It’s long been a feminist complaint that rape prevention needs to be taught to the potential perpetrators. Teaching the necessity of consent, and for that matter, what consent is, is an important step in stopping sexual assault. One recent campaign does a great job representing this: Don’t Be That Guy. Canadian organization Battered Women’s Support Services is using these ads to spread their “The Violence Stops Here” message. It makes it clear that “sex without consent = sexual assault”, and even has ads that make it clear men can be rape victims, too.

The campaign conveys the belief that consent is an active thing that must be continually given, not merely the absence of a no. “Enthusiastic consent” is a term many feminists use to describe what proper consent looks like. As in, if you are with a person who says things like “I’m not sure,” is hesitant, disengaged, or seems too inebriated to make their wishes clear, you have not adequately obtained consent and should stop. Once enthusiastic consent becomes the standard for sexual activity, it is no longer possible to dismiss rape of women who were drunk, who didn’t fight back hard enough (by someone’s standards), or any other thing society often uses to dismiss sexual assault. Most importantly, enthusiastic consent places the responsibility on us all to obtain consent, not on our partners to say no enough times or in the right way.

Because sexual assault has been framed for so long in our society as something that the victim is responsible for, it’s going to take more than one campaign to change the standard of consent. But this campaign is an excellent start.

Controversial Ballot Measure Passed Requiring Condoms in Porn


Posted on November 14, 2012 by

People in Los Angeles voted last week to pass a ballot measure mandating that condoms are used in adult films. Measure B, titled the Safer Sex in the Adult Film Industry Act, requires condoms to be used during all vaginal and anal intercourse in order to protect adult actors from the spread of HIV and other sexually transmitted infections.

The adult film industry is unhappy with the outcome of the election, arguing that the measure is unnecessary. Performers are required to have frequent STI testing and can be entered in a database accessible by the entire industry to ensure they are banned from performing.

The attitude taken by many in the industry is that condom use makes the films less appealing, saying that past company-internal condom mandates have resulted in decreased sales. If porn is a fantasy, then condom use is an unwanted dose of reality.

Personally, I wonder if part of the reason why condoms are unappealing in porn is because so many people are unaccustomed to them? If porn is the ultimate sexual fantasy (to many, at least), and condoms aren’t a part of that fantasy, perhaps that helps to make them less attractive. If condoms were to become a routine part of porn, I believe they will become normalized and therefore less unattractive. That’s my theory, anyway. Regardless, I believe if people are given the choice between porn with condoms or no porn, people will choose porn–and so if a mandate is enacted throughout the industry then sales will not be impacted to a severe degree. Overall I’m in favor of the ban, because testing rules in the industry only detect sexually transmitted infections after they already occur. Why put actor’s lives and careers at risk when we could prevent infections in the first place?

The new law won’t be enforced immediately, in part because the adult film industry plans to fight the measure, threatening to potentially move their work to another city. A move would cost Los Angeles a tremendous amount of money in tax revenues. It remains to be seen whether the condom mandate will last (or even begin), but it will be interesting to see the long-term effects.

What do you think, porn-watching Feronians? Does condom use in a porn movie decrease your enjoyment? Tell me what you think of the ban in the comments.

Charter School in Lousiana Reconsiders Kicking Out Pregnant Students


Posted on August 16, 2012 by

New Delhi charter school in Louisiana recently came under fire for forcing its teenage students to submit to pregnancy tests, and kicking out those students who tested positive or refused the test. From Slate, the school’s official policy: “If an administrator or teacher suspects a student is pregnant, a parent conference will be held. The school reserves the right to require any female student to take a pregnancy test to confirm whether or not the suspected student is in fact pregnant. The school further reserves the right to refer the suspected student to a physician of its choice. If the test indicates that the student is pregnant, the student will not be permitted to attend classes on the campus of Delhi Charter School.”

(FYI: Any student suspected of being pregnant who refuses to submit to a pregnancy test “shall be treated as a pregnant student and will be offered home study opportunities. If home study opportunities are not acceptable, the student will be counseled to seek other educational opportunities,” it said. But who’s to say the girls have parents capable of home-schooling?)

After the recent lawsuit from the ACLU, which believes the rule violates federal law requiring equal opportunity for education between the sexes, the school has stated “in light of the recent inquiry, the current policy has been forwarded to the law firm of Davenport, Files & Kelly in Monroe, Louisiana, to ensure that necessary revisions are made so that our school is in full compliance with the constitutional law.” School Board chairman Albert Christman has said that no one at the school realized anything was wrong until the lawsuit. It’s not clear yet whether a change in policy would reinstate previous students who had been forced to leave. If the school does revamp its policy to allow pregnant students to stay, there is no guarantee that pregnant teens at the school will find themselves in a supportive environment, but it will at least be a huge step forward for their chances at an education.

HIV Testing Goes Over-the-Counter


Posted on July 9, 2012 by

The FDA recently approved the over-the-counter sale of the OraQuick In-Home HIV rapid test, to be available by October for sale online and at retailers. It is an oral test that gives you results in 20 minutes. Given that the CDC recently estimated that 240,000 Americans have HIV and don’t know, this is wonderful news. Many people are afraid of asking their doctors for a test, because of the stigma attached to it and the fear of finding out they have the virus, so it is hoped that over-the-counter availability may increase testing rates. It has not been clarified what the price will be or whether it will be behind the pharmacy counter, both issues that may influence the test’s accessibility and desirability, but this new ruling may still make HIV testing more convenient and popular.

When getting testing at a health center, you receive counseling from a health educator on your test date and when you get your results. This ensures that you get adequate information and support, two things that may not be as available at home. With that in mind, here are some good things to know about at-home HIV testing before you try it:

1) It is an oral test, but it’s not testing your saliva. From the OraQuick website:

“…the OraQuick ADVANCE® HIV-1/2 Test does not use saliva, but rather absorbs antibodies directly from the blood vessels in the mucous membranes of the mouth. OraQuick ADVANCE® detects antibodies for HIV, not the virus itself.”

 

Your saliva doesn’t have enough of the virus to spread or test for infection but your mucous membranes do, so it’s important to a) make sure to perform the test correctly and b) use protection even with oral sex!

2) Timing is everything. It can take 3-6 months for a test to turn positive after HIV infection. The CDC explains it well:

“Most people will develop detectable antibodies within 2 to 8 weeks (the average is 25 days). Even so, there is a chance that some individuals will take longer to develop detectable antibodies. Therefore, if the initial negative HIV test was conducted within the first 3 months after possible exposure, repeat testing should be considered >3 months after the exposure occurred to account for the possibility of a false-negative result. Ninety-seven percent of persons will develop antibodies in the first 3 months following the time of their infection. In very rare cases, it can take up to 6 months to develop antibodies to HIV.”

To simplify matters: If you are worried about exposure to HIV, testing right away will give you a baseline only. You have to wait about 3 months before a test will be accurate, so keep that in mind.

3) A reactive test is not a necessarily a positive test. There are two types of results when using the OraQuick: non-reactive, and reactive. A non-reactive test means that no anti-bodies were found, and is considered a negative test. Reactive is a preliminary positive, meaning that a confirmatory test must be done at a lab before it can be said for sure that you have the virus. Take my advice: do not take this test at night or on a weekend, when you cannot do anything about a positive result. Do it in the morning on a weekday, so that if you have a positive result you can go straight to your doctor or your local Planned Parenthood for a confirmatory test.

Caption: On the left is a reactive test, on the right is a non-reactive test. These are pictures of the OraQuick currently used in health facilities; the at-home test may or may not be the same.

4) Have support ready. When you take your test, have a friend with you or, if you want total privacy, at least have some phone numbers on hand. You can find your local Planned Parenthood here, your local health department here, or you can use your personal doctor, friends, or family. Don’t go through this alone!

If you want an HIV test and don’t want to wait until October, come to your local Planned Parenthood where we have rapid testing with trained educators available.

We’ve Kept Abortion Legal So Far. But What About Accessible?


Posted on April 11, 2012 by

Mississippi ladies, you still aren’t safe. Even though the personhood amendment didn’t pass, the Mississippi government hasn’t given up. There is one abortion clinic in the entire state, and it may be about to close. House Bill 1390, already passed and awaiting the governor’s approval, will require that each doctor that works in the clinic have admitting privileges in a local hospital. Two major problems with this: One, many hospitals will not grant admitting privileges to out-of-state doctors, and a few of the clinic’s doctors live out of state to avoid harassment. Two, the nearby hospitals are religiously affiliated and have the right to deny any doctor admitting privileges; therefore, the doctors are unlikely to be able to comply. Governor Bryant argues that the bill is designed to “stop back-room abortions” by making sure that the doctors providing abortion services are certified OB-GYNS who may admit patients to a local hospital, if necessary. Clearly, the way to stop back alley abortions is to close your state’s only abortion clinic. For the record, the doctors at the clinic are board-certified OB-GYNs already, and lack of admitting privileges does not prevent the health center’s patients from being able to receive care, if necessary.

This bill has a good chance of becoming law soon, and what will this mean for Mississippi women? Traveling out of state is not easy for women who lack the funds, childcare, or ability to take time off work. A return to back-alley abortions is exactly what Gov. Bryant is proposing.

It’s important to remember what it was like before abortion was legal, especially for us younger women who didn’t live through that time. You can read the story of a 19-year-old’s illegal abortion in 1962 here at Alternet. As you read about her helplessness, the lack of support she had available to her, the financial strain, the travel to a foreign country, realize she was one of the lucky ones. She was able to come up with the money. She didn’t get an infection. Her uterus wasn’t perforated. She didn’t get sexually assaulted by the doctor who knew she wouldn’t be able to report it without getting in trouble herself. We can never, ever go back to this.

Let’s get real: Gov. Bryant’s statements about protecting women’s health are a lie, just like anti-choice advocates protestations about saving fetus’s lives are a lie. Law’s restricting abortion access are about restricting and punishing women’s sexuality, full stop. If this law goes through, Mississippi women are in trouble. It’s already an unhappy place for sexual health; it was found to have the highest teen birth rate in the nation a couple years ago, and schools weren’t even required to teach sex ed until last year. If this bill is signed, women in this state are going to need our help.  Activists, keep watch and get ready.

The Birth Control Black Market


Posted on March 28, 2012 by

Birth Control PillsAmidst all the hoopla about birth control access in the media recently, the Huffington Post reported that some people have resorted to buying their prescription birth control off of Craigslist: “The online marketplace is filled with ads for discounted birth control, including many types of contraceptive pills as well as the NuvaRing…Lisa sold her two unopened packages of the NuvaRing for $75 earlier this week. Without insurance, each one can cost as much as $80.”

You know, I almost don’t hate this. Women, sick of seeing their reproductive independence held financially out of their reach, helping each other out by selling their extra birth control online. A mini-black market rising in response to a failure of the system to meet their needs.

Ultimately, of course, this is very dangerous; if you are a buyer, then you don’t know if the medication you purchase has been tampered with, or left in extreme heat and no longer effective, for example.  If you are a seller, you don’t know if the person to whom you are selling the medication has medical conditions that could make the pill unsafe for them, and who’s to say you won’t be held liable?

Selling birth control through Craigslist is illegal, though to my knowledge no one has been prosecuted. And I sincerely hope no one is, because it isn’t their fault.  If women have to resort to buying birth control through Craigslist of all places, is that not a sure sign that our current healthcare system is failing women in a major way?

President Obama’s healthcare plan will make birth control more accessible for millions of women…unless he’s voted out with this election, in which case all of his healthcare plans will surely be thrown out.  But hey, maybe politicians in this country will stop pretending that birth control is controversial or immoral and stop attacking women’s sexual health for the sake of distracting us all from the real issues! But until hell freezes over, you can try your local health department, free clinic, or your friendly Planned Parenthood for affordable birth control.

Feronians, have you ever had to obtain your birth control through not-so-legit methods?  Would you buy your birth control through Craigslist?

Hooking Up: Why Does Society Fear It So Much?


Posted on February 20, 2012 by

Hooking UpWe as a nation are prone to moral panics where one social group—perhaps a more religious, conservative one—decries a social trend that threatens a traditional aspect of our society. If something is considered a threat to a conventional social order, especially a relationship model where monogamy and celibacy prior to marriage is the norm, we are often treated to multiple news stories and editorials and petitions expressing outrage. Most of the more recent issues that inspire such fear and ire are related to women’s sexuality—birth control access, abortion access, whether it’s appropriate for Komen to fund breast exams at Planned Parenthood, and “hook up culture.”

The issue of hook up culture is not a new one, but it’s still an ongoing source of contention and fear, especially among older adults who look at new types of relationships emerging on college campuses and feel afraid for what these changes mean.

What’s referred to as hook up culture is a cultural standard among young adults where sexual activity usually occurs outside the context of a relationship, often without the promise of a relationship occurring afterwards, and the absence of traditional dates. This is opposed to an older model in which a boy called a girl days in advance, a date was planned, he picked her up and met her parents, brought her home by 10, etc. While premarital sex or sexual activity outside of a relationship are new things, it does seem true that they are becoming more accepted.

Most of the fear surrounding so called hook up culture is based upon an evolutionary model of male and female sex differences that insist women are designed to become attached to a partner after sex and thus cannot really enjoy casual sex. The other side of the argument states that this model is outdated and both men and women are capable of enjoying casual sex or desiring monogamy, depending on the individual and the situation.

Sociologist Paula England has studied hook up culture extensively, and gave a lecture on the subject discussing her findings. (It’s a quick and really interesting 6-minute video.) In her research, she has discovered that in many areas, traditional pre-arranged one-on-one dating practically doesn’t exist, but that most sexual partners are found while socializing in groups of friends.  Hooking up does not necessarily mean sexual intercourse, but may mean anything from making out to intercourse. Most hookups do not lead to relationships, but most relationships she studied did start out with hooking up.  It took a “define the relationship talk” to transition between a repeated hook-up situation into a relationship situation.

Now, what interests me is not just the anatomy of hook up culture, but how does it actually affect women?  According to England, the double standard of the slut vs. stud dichotomy has not gone anywhere, sadly; women were more likely to experience slurs and judgment due to their sexual behavior.  Also, more men have orgasms than women in these hookups.  However, in repeat hookups or ones that turned into relationships, the gap in orgasm rate between men and women diminished over time.  More men than women initiated sexual contact but that does not mean the women did not want it; it may be a reflection of traditional sex roles where men are supposed to be the aggressor. England concludes that it is unclear whether a hook up culture is better or worse for women than the more traditional courtship rituals.

What seems clear to me is that our society still has much to work on when it comes to sexual equality. Even though the types of relationships, and the way they transition into relationships has changed for young adults, not enough has changed. It is not important whether young adults find sexual relationships through dating or through hooking up; I’m more concerned with a shift from a society that upholds sexist priorities to one that insists on mutual consent, sexual pleasure, and emotional honesty.