Skip to main content

reposting another older piece I believe is very relevant, especially in light of the Hobby Lobby decision.  This is from February 2012

can be seen clearly in a piece at Alternet by trained futurist and good friend Sara Robinson.  It is titled Why Patriarchal Men Are Utterly Petrified of Birth Control -- And Why We'll Still Be Fighting About it 100 Years From Now, and it's subtitle makes the thrust of the piece clear:  

Conservative bishops and Congressmen are fighting a rear-guard action against one of the most revolutionary changes in human history.
Robinson suggests 500 years from now looking back, the three great achievements of the 20th Century are likely to be the invention of the integrated circuit (without which the internet does not exist), the Moon landing (which she thinks will carry the same impact as Magellan's circumnavigation of the globe), and
the mass availability of nearly 100% effective contraception. Far from being a mere 500-year event, we may have to go back to the invention of the wheel or the discovery of fire to find something that’s so completely disruptive to the way humans have lived for the entire duration of our remembered history.
To convince you of the importance of her piece, I will offer a few more selections and then close with a personal commentary.

Robinson argues that biology condemned women to a role organized around childbearing, which allowed men to benefit, including establishing dominance in many areas.  As she writes

They got full economic and social control over our bodies, our labor, our affections, and our futures. They got to make the rules, name the gods we would worship, and dictate the terms we would live under. In most cultures, they had the right to sex on demand within the marriage, and also to break their marriage vows with impunity — a luxury that would get women banished or killed. As long as pregnancy remained the defining fact of our lives, they got to run the whole show. The world was their party, and they had a fabulous time.
As I read these words I thought of three Ks -  not as applied to American culture, but to the latter part of the first half of the last century in Germany:  for the Nazis, the role of women was defined as Kinder, Kirche, Kuche -  kids, church and kitchen.  For too many patriarchal males today, that phraseology still seems to represent their thinking.

Safe and effective contraception -  the IUD as well as the pill, for example - meant that women were no longer defined by their biology:  

We could choose to delay childbearing and limit the number of children we raise; and that, in turn, freed up time and energy to explore the world beyond the home. We could refuse to marry or have babies at all, and pursue our other passions instead. Contraception was the single necessary key that opened the door to the whole new universe of activities that had always been zealously monopolized by the men — education, the trades, the arts, government, travel, spiritual and cultural leadership, and even (eventually) war making.
Thus the age-old social contracts between men and women become somewhat obsolete, and new ones needed to be negotiated.  Some men clearly understand that this empowers them as well, but for others?  
And, frankly, while some men have embraced this new order— perhaps seeing in it the potential to open up some interesting new choices for them, too — a global majority is increasingly confused, enraged, and terrified by it. They never wanted to be at this table in the first place, and they’re furious to even find themselves being forced to have this conversation at all.
  That includes the bishops of the Roman Catholic Church:  
they understand, better than most of us, just how unprecedented this development is in the grand sweep of history, and the serious threat it poses to everything their church has stood for going back to antiquity. (Including, very much, the more recent doctrine of papal infallability.)
  It is similar in the rise of fundamentalism around the world -  fundamental Christianity in this country, strand of Islam including things like the Taliban, some strands of Orthodox Judaism, etc.  As Robinson puts it cogently:  
Drill down to the very deepest center of any of these movements, and you'll find men who are experiencing this change as a kind of personal annihilation, a loss of masculine identity so deep that they are literally interpreting it as the end of the world. (The first rule of understanding apocalyptic movements is this: If someone tells you the world is ending, believe them. Because for them, it probably is.)
Some may not stop to realize it, but consider:  
Male privilege has been with us for — how long? Ten thousand years? A hundred thousand? Contraception, in the mere blink of an eye in historical terms, toppled the core rationale that justified that entire system. And now, every aspect of human society is frantically racing to catch up with that stunning fact. Everything will have to change in response to this — families, business, religion, politics, economics…everything.
 Some men are desperately battling to restore male dominance.  I might note we see it in language that criticizes the increasing advantage women have in some elite educational institutions, or in language that argues males are being discriminated against, or excluded in some fashion.  

The retrograde male chauvinists and their female aliies (and there are some, who somehow do not see the visibility they are allowed to have as contrary to the positions they argue) are

marshaling their vast resources to get every last one of Pandora’s frolicking contraception-fueled demons back into the box.
Let me offer some personal observations.

I will be 66 in abou 3 months.

I lived through the sexual revolution.

The entire singles scene in the bars of the Upper East Side of Manhattan would not have been possible without access to dependable contraception.  

The sexual revolution which enabled men and women to explore the beauties of sexual expression for its own sake, or as an expression of love or passion, would be far less a part of our existence without contraception.

The enrichment of our society by the contributions of women - in science, law, medicine, education, athletics, business, even religion - would be far less absent contraception and how women were thereby empowered.

Sex cannot be only for the purposes of procreation -  otherwise why have we not banned it once women are past childbearing age?

Why does the Roman Catholic Church not condemn vasectomies if no artificial method of birth control is acceptable?

Why do they allow marriages between septuagenarians to be consecrated in the Church?

My life has been greatly enriched by the contributions of women.  I am one of two children of a woman who graduated from law school at the age of 21.  I grew up believing women could and should be equal to men.   I was surprised that the mothers of my friends did not have careers.

I have coached both boys and girls soccer.  I actually enjoyed the latter more - they were discovering and experiencing uses of their bodies beyond the procreational, and some actually discovered their physical vitality was in no way in conflict with their being attractive to men.  My girls' team had GPAs significantly higher than my boys' teams.  Despite my long feminism, that was a real eye-opener for me.  

I have a spouse with a distinguished career of her own.  We have a marriage of more than 25 years.  We made a choice, as have some of our friends, that we could love children who were not biologically our own, and did not have to procreate.  That did not mean that our marriage was going to be sexless, let me assure you.  

My self-image and accomplishments (if I have any), my role in society, is in no way diminished by the accomplishments of women, any more than our marriage is threatened by the same-sex unions of others we know.  Love is love, and should be allowed expression beyond the legal definition of marriage (although that legal definition should not be discriminatory).  I have worked for and with women, have supervised women employees.  My student teachers have been both women and men.

I have seen society change enough that one of my fellow teachers is now pregnant with her third (of what will be four) children, but has been able to keep her job as an effective math teacher (and an important role model for our female students).

Sara Robinson warns us about what is happening right now,

much of the history of this century, when it’s finally written, will be the story of our children’s ongoing struggles against the organized powers that intend to seize back the means of our liberation, and turn back the clock to the way things used to be.
We are seeing that battle play out right now in Washington and around this nation.

This is not just about religion.

This is not just about women's health.

This is not just about contraception.

This is about what kind of society we will be.

This is about whether a few will be allowed to impose their beliefs - religious or political or whatever - on the vast majority of the rest of us.

This is about Bishops who cannot get their own followers to follow their dictates -  after all, 98% of Catholics do not follow the rules promulgated under Humanae Vitae - to attempt to impose them through the legal structures of our secular society.

This is but a step on a path that would not only overturn Roe v Wade, but also Griswold v Connecticut.

This is a battle that is already joined.

This is a war that is ongoing, and we cannot let the other side be the only ones fighting it.

This is about all of us.

Thanks, Sara, for your powerful piece.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I do not apologize for these respostings (412+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    claude, Alumbrados, paradox, Sylv, Kascade Kat, Mogolori, scribeboy, Chi, Radiowalla, Gooserock, Pandora, NYmom, Jim Riggs, Emerson, Yoshimi, Shockwave, LynChi, mslat27, polecat, Caneel, joynow, ehavenot, mrblifil, Clues, mollyd, Terre, fumie, aitchdee, Tomtech, Redfire, tidalwave1, psnyder, white blitz, exiledfromTN, JimWilson, Sychotic1, houyhnhnm, lcrp, cognocenza, sebastianguy99, Gowrie Gal, rapala, G2geek, historys mysteries, Bluesee, Ckntfld, BluejayRN, blueyedace2, mjd in florida, Lying eyes, Chinton, dewtx, ChemBob, Kdoug, reflectionsv37, fixxit, eru, GreenPA, SaraBeth, Pam from Calif, Blu Gal in DE, turdraker, Ekaterin, kathny, xaxnar, begone, Paul Ferguson, Captain Sham, Themistoclea, serendipityisabitch, dot farmer, DFWmom, Caniac41, richardvjohnson, marleycat, leeleedee, jack 1966, politik, democracy inaction, Superpole, Raggedy Ann, Powered Grace, Jake Williams, Marihilda, mikidee, pioneer111, laurel g 15942, biggiefries, geordie, Portia Elm, Getreal1246, itsjim, sound of progress, CoolOnion, smokem2271, jfromga, Voiceless, annominous, get the red out, Ellid, jdmorg, sngmama, sc kitty, tuesdayschilde, petulans, wader, Teiresias70, lupinella, asterkitty, johanus, musicsleuth, SeaTurtle, mattc129, JBL55, LaFeminista, jomi, fba1a, Babsnc, Lily O Lady, samanthab, wordwraith, oakroyd, Dave in Northridge, bbctooman, unfangus, surfbird007, Demeter Rising, radarlady, celdd, nzanne, Joieau, scyellowdogdem, Aaa T Tudeattack, borndem, cjfb, dfwlibrarian, Arahahex, PatMcDowell, FindingMyVoice, fou, shaharazade, Habitat Vic, StateofEuphoria, Syoho, ColoTim, Sun Tzu, BlueDragon, Nicci August, Superskepticalman, ORswede, ashowboat, fiercefilms, Mimikatz, JanetT in MD, Laurel in CA, chimpy, OjaiValleyCali, wenchacha, 57andFemale, AJayne, Prognosticator, NYFM, myboo, grollen, mod2lib, paz3, louisev, mikejay611, zerelda, brentut5, Avilyn, slowbutsure, SmartRat, ArthurPoet, Stwriley, sturunner, countwebb, Assaf, Shrew in Shrewsbury, SuWho, Bring the Lions, snackdoodle, Vienna Blue, akmk, Wreck Smurfy, JVolvo, Involuntary Exile, HedwigKos, RN that thinks, nellgwen, beyondbeyond, LibrErica, Buckeye54, Statusquomustgo, TheMeansAreTheEnd, ERTBen, third Party please, shortgirl, vahana, Matilda, wild hair, Empower Ink, Born in NOLA, Leap Year, maregug, basquebob, One Pissed Off Liberal, dRefractor, Only Needs a Beat, PinHole, splashy, leonard145b, Turbonerd, Santa Susanna Kid, royce, Figgie, Rogneid, lotlizard, AverageJoe42, where4art, ivote2004, schnecke21, zitherhamster, gfv6800, CalNM, bakeneko, melo, Larsstephens, lrganassi, sb, rja, eagleray, Mathazar, emal, Byron from Denver, ExpatGirl, whaddaya, petestern, FarWestGirl, Morningglory, MVH1, Hetrose, Oly moly, lissablack, silverfoxcruiser, tofumagoo, aratinga, SunnyDay, Ado Annie, Whamadoodle, travelerxxx, Andrew F Cockburn, Ellamenta, ram27, MtnWolfGrl, reasonshouldrule, snwflk, eyeswideopen, BMorgan, SillyMama, Skyprogress, dalef77, Imanamcan, Lilredhead, Tangerinegirl20, GirlSwimmingInASeaOfRed, ndiablo, dewolf99, Toprow, Miss Jones, gardnerhill, DebFrmHell, MarciaJ720, Wisewoman1, cocinero, giftsthatpurr, Ohiodem1, Tex Arcana, DorothyToto, ridovem, walkshills, PSzymeczek, bobcat41702

    I think they are relevant

    there are many members of this community who were not around when I first offered them

    I think they still retain some value

    people can respond as they see fit

    peace

    "Don't ask what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive and go do it, because what the world needs is more people who have come alive." - Howard Thurman

    by teacherken on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 05:37:01 PM PDT

  •  If there is ever such a thing (47+ / 0-)

    as a male birth control pill that is just as effective as what is currently available to women, is there any doubt in anyones mind that the Republicans will want that covered without question, religious beliefs be damned?

    "There was no such thing as a "wealthy" hunter-gatherer. It is the creation of human society that has allowed the wealthy to become wealthy. As such, they have an obligation to pay a bit more to sustain that society than the not-so-wealthy." - Me

    by Darth Stateworker on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 05:54:26 PM PDT

    •  That, or maybe they'd try to ban it like the gun (17+ / 0-)

      fanatics who are opposed to any other gun owner being able to buy a gun which only the owner can fire.  (Both the potential manufacturer and gun shops who were considering carrying it received death threats.)

      When you're dealing with people (generally men) operating on high emotion - low cognition states, their positions on issues doesn't necessarily make much sense.

    •  only if (13+ / 0-)

      men got pregnant

      “Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well-being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way.” ― Martin Luther King Jr.

      by minglewood on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 08:02:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Actually, they dream of uncanny impregnation ... (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      G2geek, wader, wenchacha

      ... at a distance.

      Kickstart that and you'll raise 1B conservative dollars in under a week.

      Vote rape. Vote torture. Vote War Crimes. Vote with the American top 1%.

      by Yellow Canary on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 09:04:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Of course because when women have sex (26+ / 0-)

      without consequences (pregnancy), they are sluts and unnatural. When men have recreational sex, well ... boys will be boys! And of course they shouldn't have to foot the bill.

      Ed FitzGerald for governor Of Ohio. Women's lives depend on it. http://www.edfitzgeraldforohio.com/

      by anastasia p on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 10:23:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  There is such a thing as (8+ / 0-)

      a vasectomy. I am curious to know if Hobby Lobby has an opinion on this medical procedure, which, as far as I know, is covered by standard insurance policies. Because, unborn children should not be prevented from swimming freely about in a woman's parts.

      It would be hard to deny that this anti birth control movement is driven by men. After all, who sits on all the state legislatures where these laws get passed? 80-90% men is my best guess. Who signs these laws? Mostly men governors. Who legislated from the bench in the last SCOTUS decision in Hobby Lobby? Five men.

      It almost looks as though women aren't even allowed to have an opinion.

      And finally, when they pass laws controlling women's private medical needs based on religious beliefs rather than science, then America is dead.

         

      A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

      by onionjim on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 04:43:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I looked into the Court ruling (3+ / 0-)

        It's not as sweeping as I think most here believe.  While I don't think there should be restrictions - It seems to be quite specific about what has been allowed to be "not offered: and what is or must be offered:

        It doesn't affect:

        • Most birth control pills

        • Condoms

        • Sponges

        • Sterilization

        It does affect:

        • Plan B "morning-after pill"

        • Ella "morning-after pill"

        • Hormonal and copper intrauterine devices (IUDs)

        The companies in the case and their supporters object to IUDs and morning-after pills, saying they cause abortions by blocking a fertilized egg from implanting in the uterus. Groups that lobby for reproductive rights contend the drugs and devices prevent fertilization from occurring, which can lead to unwanted pregnancies and surgical abortions.

        The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

        by ctexrep on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 07:21:06 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  And those groups (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          tle, shaharazade, ColoTim, Leap Year

          are religious in nature. Not scientific. Exactly what the framers said NOT to do.

          A true craftsman will meticulously construct the apparatus of his own demise.

          by onionjim on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 07:35:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You don't need to convince me (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            third Party please

            I'm just posting what was / was not included.  By reading some of the comments - I think a lot of people think they don't or won't provide any form of contraception  - that's just not the case.

            The care of human life and happiness, and not their destruction, is the first and only legitimate object of good government. - Thomas Jefferson

            by ctexrep on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:43:46 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  That kind of talk should be HR'ed. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              nellgwen

              Don't you realize that we need to frame this to be that ALL birth control for women is being affected.  That will get a whole lot more women on our side than the garbage that you are spouting.

            •  The court issued a "clarification" (10+ / 0-)

              that DID expand the ruling to cover all 20 types of birth control the day after the initial ruling came down. Whether Hobby Lobby chooses to restrict the other 16 or not, OTHER employers WILL have that option -- and no doubt some will use it either because they can or because they don't realize they're eliminating all of them.

              There IS no fig leaf in this case.  It has no basis in science or law and fuck-all to do with religion. This is purely and simply about control -- and the loss of it.  Full stop.

              I'll believe corporations are people when one comes home from Afghanistan in a body bag.

              by mojo11 on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 01:25:29 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  isn't it also about money? (0+ / 0-)

                How much money is saved by not covering bc costs?  Enough to affect a corporation's bottom line?  

                •  Since HL is self insured (0+ / 0-)

                  there may be a minuscule savings to their policy, but certainly not one they couldn't absorb.  And the administrative costs of carving out one specific kinds of service a non-covered would probably swallow up any savings they realized.  Add to that the fact that HL had no problem covering these medications and related services PRE-Obamacare, and the cost argument falls pretty flat.

                  Indirectly, yes, it's always ultimately about money.  But this is more about keeping the girls in the stores in line and making sure they don't get to uppity.  And of course damaging Obama and the ACA.

                  I'll believe corporations are people when one comes home from Afghanistan in a body bag.

                  by mojo11 on Tue Jul 08, 2014 at 04:42:30 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  But they won't have to... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Ellamenta, acornweb

              ... SCOTUS declared in a simple sentence that the mandate is unconstitutional.

              From a Mother Jones article: "On Tuesday, the Court indicated that its ruling applies to for-profit employers who object to all twenty forms of birth control included in the Affordable Care Act's contraceptive mandate, not just the four methods at issue in the two cases decided on Monday."

        •  None of their objections (5+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          ColoTim, onionjim, wenchacha, nellgwen, splashy

          have any scientific validity.

          I would think that a reasonable legal system would apply some sort of validity test to this kind of assertion; there are are a lot of of really crazy "sincerely held beliefs" out there.

          At very least, there were enough examples in this case which showed a lack of consistency that IMHO demonstrate clearly that this was a political and not a religious objection.

        •  Court said Tuesday it covers all birth control (9+ / 0-)

          The Court set aside every lower court case where the companies lost and sent them back for reconsideration, making clear that ANY form of birth control to which the company objected was covered.  This is really bad, and don't minimize it.

          Don't bet your future on 97% of climate scientists being wrong. Take action on climate now!

          by Mimikatz on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 08:50:25 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Only technically correct (7+ / 0-)

          I haven't had the time to read the sources myself, but lots of people here over the past couple of days have been commenting that the justices stated that the same logic should hold for all other means of birth control, if and when lawsuits naming them are actually brought to the court.  So the effect now may only be for the four methods named, but the rest are equally condemned, and their "stay of execution" only temporary.  That "rest" includes the three recognized methods of sterilization.

          Which means that yes, companies could get out of having their insurance plans "pay for" vasectomies and female sterilization as well.  Even though such surgeries for women are occasionally life-saving.

        •  IUD's (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          nellgwen, third Party please

          My niece gave birth to a beautiful set of twins a year ago - and she was using an IUD - abortion causing.. right....  I know the failure rate is very low.. but things do happen.  She was very lucky even though they were born 8 weeks early.. they are very very very healthy babies.  

          Hobby Lobby is just the beginning- regardless of the fact that they are just picking 3 forms of birth control that they won't cover.  This is just the beginning.  

          Why do Republicans Hate Americans?

          by Caniac41 on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 12:05:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I had a miscarriage at 22 weeks--- (0+ / 0-)

            Due to an infected IUD.  Was taken to the closest hospital---which happened to be a Catholic hospital.. They were shall we say--not very friendly.  I signed myself out against MD orders to get AWAY.

            A friend had an IUD and her baby was born holding it in her HAND.    Another had one inserted UPSIDE DOWN and almost killed her--AND she became pregnant ANYWAY  

            And yes---the fail rate is low but these can also perforate the uterus;  the ones with hormones added can fail if the hormones run out; they are not recommended for many women over  or under a certain weight or even if you have --or have NOT had--a child!  They can cause massive bleeding even if they do not perforate.  OR they can cause you to not have a period leading you to always wonder-AM I pregnant? They can come OUT with out you noticing.  Leaving you back at square 1---but without the KNOWLEDGE that you now NEED to use a back-up plan.    They cost the earth and some MD's won't use them.  

            And getting one can be a real hassle---finding a place to GET one and then having the MONEY to get one---and NO mail order will NOT work on this.  Altho I hear Hobby Lobby is going to have some nice decorative go-alongs for these!  Copper wire wrap kits;  decorative strings; color co-ordinated plastic parts!

        •  They like the kinds that are more difficult (0+ / 0-)

          Therefore more likely to fail because of human nature.

          You know, the ones that are more likely to end up with a pregnancy. None of that almost for-sure birth control, or something that will stop it after a rape or other unexpected possible cause of pregnancy like birth control failure.

          No way!



          Women create the entire labor force.
          ---------------------------------------------
          Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

          by splashy on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 04:39:18 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  They like the kinds that are more difficult (0+ / 0-)

          Therefore more likely to fail because of human nature.

          You know, the ones that are more likely to end up with a pregnancy. None of that almost for-sure birth control, or something that will stop it after a rape or other unexpected possible cause of pregnancy like birth control failure.

          No way!



          Women create the entire labor force.
          ---------------------------------------------
          Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

          by splashy on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 04:50:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  That changed a day later (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          silverfoxcruiser, aratinga, SunnyDay

          It is now quite clear it applies to all contraceptive methods.

        •  Here is a link that refutes what you're saying (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Lilredhead, Tangerinegirl20

          I don't assume, I should hasten to point out, that you made your statement with any ill will--I don't know your comment history, and don't have time at the moment to research it, so I assume good motives--but you're incorrect, I'm afraid:

          http://www.scotusblog.com/...

          The Supreme Court ordered appeals courts to re-hear cases involving ALL the 20 kinds of birth control, not just the four that Hobby Lobby disliked.

        •  That's not the problem I have with their ruling... (0+ / 0-)

          That's not the problem I have with their ruling. It's sexist. No one has a right to tell me what I can and can't do with my body. They also don't have the right to come between me and my health insurance. Men don't have anyone telling them or their insurance what is allowableand what is not, you can bet if anyone tried they wouldn't get very far.

      •  The New Inquisition? (9+ / 0-)
        Who legislated from the bench in the last SCOTUS decision in Hobby Lobby? Five men.
        Five men who are conservative Roman Catholics. Hard to escape the thought that driving this decision is the knowledge of the Flailing Five SCOTUS members that so many US Catholic women use some form of birth control, and this decision is a way to send a message about the wrongness of that, hidden behind an interpretation of the law. Additionally, this Roman Catholic teaching can now be shoved down the throats, rhetorically speaking, of the non-Catholic citizens of our country.

        Welcome to the 21st Century Secular US Inquisition, driven by the fantasies and wishes of Opus Dei.

        God's preference is for more people to be included, (not excluded through doctrine),...whenever the circle is shrinking, where people are being excluded or disliked, God is not served. -Rev. Alice Connor

        by paz3 on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 10:20:27 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  the decisions of men (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lilredhead

        yes America is now dead.  i wish i could get out of here before it gets so much worse.  and it will get worse, and it scares the hell out of me.

    •  of course (8+ / 0-)

      then forced birth  Republican congressmen don't have to be embarrassed by tapes of conversations where they tell their mistresses to have an abortion.

    •  Of course such a drug will be covered! (13+ / 0-)

      Just as vasectomies and implants and viagra will always be covered.

      Because the issue really isn't about sex. The men who are writing these laws get caught over and over and over having extra marital affairs. They are hypocrites of the highest order.

      For Hobby Lobby, it isn't about religion, really, or they wouldn't have so much $$$ invested in the birth control they don't wan't women to have. They are hypocrites of the highest order.

      The Catholic Church has Pedophiles as priests. In practice they certainly don't think that the sexual act is fro procreation, or they wouldn't molest so many children. They are Hypocrites of the highest order.  

      This is about control and oppression of women.

  •  Good diary. (60+ / 0-)

    I believe I read that Alternet piece when it came out -- possibly at your prompting then, too.

    I would quibble a bit with some of Robinson's sweeping statements about male/female relationships over time.  For one, there is some evidence of the worship of female gods by societies that did not understand that male participation was required for babies to be born.

    For another, there used to be a quite effective birth control plant during the Roman era that was so revered it featured on coins of the province.  It was harvested sustainable for centuries, until it was turned over to governors whose only concern was short-term profits, after which it -- surprise, surprise -- was harvested to extinction.

    Likewise, some Native American societies operated such that married women only had children every seven years.  And while there were different gender roles, they weren't necessarily as hierarchical as Europeans were when they invaded.  For example, the Iroquois Confederacy, from which some of the U.S. Constitution is cribbed, allowed only one gender to vote...

    women.

    They voted for male "leaders", it's true.  But it was the decision of the women which men were wise enough to be made leaders.

    All that said... yeah, the patriarchy and its champions hate "women's lib."  And they're going to keep fighting to take us back.

    © cai Visit 350.org to join the fight against global warming.

    by cai on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 05:58:30 PM PDT

  •  I hope men,especially young men, will wake up (25+ / 0-)

    ...and understand that eventually this effort to end contraception will mean no condoms!Yes this is a direct effort to control women but by implication it will lead to men as well.

    The Democratic Party should make sure they remind guys what our lives would be like without contraception.

    The politicians may be bought, and the system corrupt, but it is our duty to fix these things.

    by sebastianguy99 on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 06:00:16 PM PDT

  •  it's time to repost this, thank you. And it's (42+ / 0-)

    time to reteach the young.
       A while ago there was an inflammatory cartoon being talked about here on dkos (and elsewhere, I think, but I refuse to social network). The image was of a broken coat-hanger, twisted into the shape of an elephant. I drew a little one and asked a lot of people what they thought of it. People Over 40 were shocked or otherwise indicated that they knew what that was. People under 40 unanimously said, What? I don't get it.

    The cultural images have changed. I'm 50, and I grew up reaping all the benefits of Title IX, and only ever found 'being a girl' to be to my advantage. But I also had eyes wide open to the stories of my aunts and grandmothers, whose choices were severely restricted.

    We are having this fight again because people who need to control others never give up. We are only losing because we haven't kept up the pressure to keep what we gained.

    We are all pupils in the eyes of God.

    by nuclear winter solstice on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 06:03:04 PM PDT

  •  I think what the Hobby Lobby case is really all (41+ / 0-)

    about is creating religious exemptions to laws for businesses. Companies are going to start getting very religious. And some churches are going to start having opinions about environmental laws, labor laws, and so on. I could almost hear it now; "Your Honor, my client feels he should not have to pay minimum wage because it's against his religious beliefs as in the Hobby Lobby case." The Supreme Court opened up a Pandora's Box with this one.

    Where are all the jobs, Boehner?

    by Dirtandiron on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 06:03:21 PM PDT

  •  You are a voice (19+ / 0-)

    of calm wisdom on a stormy sea.  And sometimes we need to be reminded that the thing we are striving for is eternal:

    "This is about what kind of society we will be."

    "The light which puts out our sight is darkness to us." Thoreau

    by NancyWH on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 06:06:37 PM PDT

  •  Just A Few Years Younger, Lived Thru it Too (36+ / 0-)

    and despite all the changes of the 60's, and the space race of which our family was an intimate part, the Internet explosion in which I had a part, no change compares with the gender changes brought by the Pill over a few years during the 60's.

    In 63 as you can see on movie reruns everything was still about women "snaring" their man and everyone protecting her reputation from being thought of as that kind of girl. Well there was much more sophisticated entertainment around, always had been especially from Europe, but the reality on the ground that I lived with was women and girls who had to take serious care with their deployment. The mainstream gender pictures really began to change by 64 or so.

    Less than 10 years later there were midwest middle class state colleges opening co-ed dormitories.

    The tail end pre boomers as a generation --many pioneering exceptions noted of course-- never could get past this.

    Only a few years ago it was routine to read right on this blog that the Republicans would never repeal RvW because of its value as an election ruse. THere were some few of us who were saying they'd do that and take back Griswold as well.

    Democrats share with Republicans a certain incapacity to believe in problems that don't happen to them personally. For the Republicans it causes lack of empathy, on our side it causes a priori surrender.

    I'm glad the physical interference with birth control has finally convinced Democrats that the rightwing means some of what it says. I only wish our side would develop the capacity that would let us grasp the warnings in a more timely fashion, like those warnings about race, gender, environment, and government suppression and others of today's issues that were being clearly spelled out half an effing century ago.

    When you hear sky is falling panicking over what the RW and corporatists are planning, keep in mind that their outrages of this week were the subject of warning going back half a dozen presidents. Better to finally begin erring on the side of caution.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 06:11:37 PM PDT

  •  This is SO important-Handmaid's Tale! (22+ / 0-)

    It started in Genesis.

    When the Israelites were "wandering in the desert" the women weren't too crazy about getting pregnant. That's when men realized that this could be a problem.

    In Germany prior to WWII, the Nazis pushed the "evil" of birth control, because they realized that the women were recalcitrant.

    You have to look very deeply into the perverse sociology of this attitude among men.

    I can't even begin in a comment to describe the horrible psychology of the old men in the Catholic church.

    But the real challenge RIGHT NOW is to translate this symptom into something that will scare the hell out of young folks--especially young women--and get them to vote a few months from now. History is NOT their favorite subject.

    Personally, I'd make the book "The Handmaid's Tail" required reading for every woman of childbearing age.

    •  We have to get everyone out to vote because if we (9+ / 0-)

      can take abck the House and get a solid majority in the Senate Sam the Sham of the Supremes can be impeached just like the President.

      For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.

      by snackdoodle on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 07:52:28 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And They Are Potentially Susceptible (9+ / 0-)

        Roberts and Alito both lied under oath when they testified before the Senate for confirmation.  They're casual disregard for stare decisis, which they averred they considered holy write, since sitting on the bench demonstrates definitively that they perjured themselves.

        Scalia and Thomas have those little problems with family dealings when Bush v. Gore was being decided.  They could also get sucked into the vortex.  Until these issues get the full investigations they demand, the nation will never get justice, because we've seen repeatedly that Republicans have no shame.

        "Love the Truth, defend the Truth, speak the Truth, and hear the Truth" - Jan Hus, d.1415 CE

        by PrahaPartizan on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 06:24:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  There is a lot there. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          LSophia, snackdoodle, Rogneid

          Conflicts of interest abound. But until the House and 2/3 of the Senate (really, not Liebermann and 45 days) are Democratic, not a chance of it.

          And until progressives stop arguing about angels on heads of pins and get as determined as GOP to just make elections happen, we will never get there.

          Young women in this country need to be scared straight to the voting booth. They just don't know history.

          •  We got the first black president elected TWICE (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LSophia, SuWho, PrahaPartizan, splashy, Rogneid

            and by comfortable margins. We can do anything we set our minds to. I live in a red state in a pretty solidly blue district but we are working all over the state to get the vote out and what we are finding is a lot of old style republicans are as pissed about the state of afairs as we are and for mostly the same reasons. It is going to take both parties on the same page to fix this mess. Very often finding that common ground isn't as difficult as the GOP talking heads and delinquents would lead us to believe.

            For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.

            by snackdoodle on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 09:51:46 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  So why do some women oppose contraception? (9+ / 0-)

    I still think this has a lot to do with punishment by the forced birth crowd.

    The USA and the rest of the world face a dangerous enemy that not only threatens our freedom but our very existence. This enemy is deeply embedded within society and is actively working towards our annihilation. That enemy is ignorance.

    by Ex Con on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 06:17:00 PM PDT

  •  I'd say that the invention of the airplane (7+ / 0-)

    without which the moon landing wouldn't have been possible, which shrunk the world in ways only matched by the internet, was more important.

    But that quibble aside, I totally agree that yesterday's ruling was all about pantywaist preservers of prudish patriarchy reacting desperately to women gaining power over their bodies and lives and thus power in general, which scares the bejeezus out of these ossified scrotum carriers.

    I don't think this will be an issue 100 years from now, though. I give them 20-30 years before they're done, and I'm being conservative.

    "Reagan's dead, and he was a lousy president" -- Keith Olbermann 4/22/09

    by kovie on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 06:17:56 PM PDT

  •  I think this is the midstream of the 4th Great (23+ / 0-)

    Awakening or "moral revival" of our country.  There have been at least 3 earlier ones but this one seems esp. pernicious in its insistence on the right to control other people's morality instead of dealing with their own.  Trace the roots back to Jerry Falwell and his merry band of revolutionists who discovered Maoist style insurrection (oh the irony) and applied those principles to Rushdooney style theology and we have our present coup d'etat by fiat.

    The impetus for this "New Christianity" is two basic concepts: 1) is that faith alone saves; works are unnecessary for salvation and 2) is that once saved, always saved.  This means once you have a "Come to Jesus" moment, you are saved forever.  You are free to go out and establish new Treblinkas and gulags with impunity as no act can imperil your  salvation.

    This leaves lots of time to micromanage other people's morality as you have no need to examine your own actions or to place them against the filter of the Gospels.  Instead, it is "I got mine and nothing can take away my salvation"

    Hobby Lobby, Duck Dynasty and even the Bundy clan are all examples of Dominionists who wish to establish a Christian caliphate here on earth in the US.  They wish to impose their narrow view of biblical history and morality on everyone else while remaining free to live their lives as they please (So HL folks can rail against BC for their employees and customers but are also free to invest in Big Pharm that produces BC products because they are saved forever.  God will overlook their minor faux pas)  

    •  Interesting take on it (0+ / 0-)

      I hadn't considered this possibility, but it seems plausible.

      This means once you have a "Come to Jesus" moment, you are saved forever.  You are free to go out and establish new Treblinkas and gulags with impunity as no act can imperil your  salvation.

      This leaves lots of time to micromanage other people's morality as you have no need to examine your own actions or to place them against the filter of the Gospels.  Instead, it is "I got mine and nothing can take away my salvation"

      I might add or change it slightly to replace "filter of the Gospels" with "filter of internal or external moral compass".  Having that sense of irrevocable salvation might free someone from deeply considering the impact of their actions.

      But they may already have that kind of tendency anyway and be drawn toward that message because it fits with the way they like to live.

      Still trying to figure it all out

      by CindyV on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 04:04:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Yesterday's ruling was nothing more than (18+ / 0-)

    five members of the "supreme" court exercising their political option to put ACA, the signature of a Democratic President out of business.  

    This was no religious rights argument that all the fake trappings would have you believe.  It was 100% political.

    They will continue to hack away at it, unless Democratic Presidents change the balance of the court.

    I will vote for any Democrat who has the best chance of defeating a Republican for President.

    It is that important.

    •  Although Teacherken's diary is a very important (14+ / 0-)

      aspect of what underlines the case, I agree that taking down the ACA brick by brick (starting with optional Medicaid expansion) was another of the main goals.  In addition, giving more power to corporations to rule our lives is an ongoing Roberts goal, and in a narrower way, the five Catholic men, led by the priggish Alito, wanted to do their American bishops' bidding and punish women (especially poor women and women of color) for having non-procreative sex.

      "It ain't right, Atticus," said Jem. "No, son, it ain't right." --Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird

      by SottoVoce on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 07:30:30 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  brick by brick (0+ / 0-)

        agreed, that is part of what they're doing and gleefully punishing women for 'getting out of [their] control.

      •  And if they DO procreate--- (0+ / 0-)

        If they DO procreate--which --sorry--does involve them having SEX---the resulting offspring will be starved and deprived of health education and the general welfare of our society BECAUSE their parents dared to be---poor.  

        Once the lil darlins are out of that uterus---they are scum in the eyes of the 1%.  And MOST of the 99% to boot.

        They won't get health care--if the ACA is abolished.

        They won't get proper education because-Common Core and No Child Left Behind have FAILED and NO one seems able to FIX this

        They won't be properly fed because--SNAP  and WIC etc are  TOO EXPENSIVE and they should get off their lazy asses and by gum WORK for their food.  Child labor?  Well they can WALK can't they?  Put 'em to work!

        They won't be respected as human beings because they don't HAVE the advantages of the 1% or the other "well offs" in society.  Who feel free to look down on all who are NOT like them or who don't have the same bank balances.

        They will be turned into yet more cannon fodder for the rich peoples "Splendid Little Wars"  and minimum wage slaves.  

        But as a FETUS--well!   Isn't THAT speschul!!!!!!!  We must PROTECT that at ALL costs!  

  •  Powerful repost, thank you (12+ / 0-)

    This is so important.  I keep hoping this is the death throes of the patriarchy, but the damned thing just won't die!

    I don't see why more men aren't upset about this.  I know no men who want to worry about pregnancy every time they have sex, or want twenty children.  Birth control sets them free, too.

  •  So some men experience women being free to (6+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    snackdoodle, LSophia, sfgb, Ckntfld, Smoh, SuWho

    control and make choices about their own bodys and reproduction as the death  of themselves. That is a serious loss of ego functioning because it is connected to the regulation of a woman's vagina which is no longer important to the social relations of pleasure, control and reproduction.  I really had no idea that so many deranged heterosexual males were so utterly threatened by the loss of their vaginal perogatives.

  •  Great diary... (6+ / 0-)

    One nit:

    Why does the Roman Catholic Church not condemn vasectomies if no artificial method of birth control is acceptable?
    They do condemn vasectomies - at least in lip service.

    “Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.” - John Steinbeck (Disputed)

    by RichM on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 07:02:06 PM PDT

    •  Vasectomies, condoms... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      snackdoodle, LSophia

      The Church is nothing if not consistent in its backward thinking on the birth control issue.

      © grover


      So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

      by grover on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 07:19:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And it's a bunch of celibate virgins dictating (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        fou, Prognosticator

        the terms of sex to the rest of the world. Does that sound right to you?

        •  Celibate, in theory. (0+ / 0-)

          There is no rule a man has to be a virgin before becoming a priest.

          I've known a couple priests who were married (one had kids and grand kids)  and their wives died. Then they entered the priesthood. They were actually great priests.

          © grover


          So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

          by grover on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 08:22:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Ostensibly celibate. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          white blitz

          I've always been suspicious about that.

          So endith the trick.

          by itsjim on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 06:08:42 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I know! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Prognosticator

          It always baffles me that anybody takes them seriously.

          •  Annnnndddd--- (0+ / 0-)

            There are some forms of Catholic where you CAN be MARRIED---and be a PRIEST.  

            Yes.

            And it's NOT the Orthodox Eastern Church either.

            I don't know much about this but I know some one whose sin-law became a PRIEST altho he WAS married;  living with the woman for lots of years;  had several kids--and she was still very much alive and they were STILL MARRIED.  

            And also some Catholic Priests who decide to get married and leave the Church "simply" switch to Catholic Lite--episcopal.  Where they STILL get to ponce around in robes and tell people what to DO with their lives.  But they get to have sex while doing that.  With consenting grown ups no less.

            I think you cannot BECOME married WHILE a Priest tho---that is still taboo.  And the oppression of the WOMEN in the Church---the nuns left to fend for themselves after YEARS of dedication and service--kicked OUT of the Church for daring to need MEDICAL CARE--look it up.  

            How the Catholics are even still in existence--I dunno.  

    •  Ok, thanks for this (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LSophia

      I thought they did, but I was confused when I read that.

  •  I wish Robinson would post more (11+ / 0-)

    I've tried to keep up with her work, but she seems to have dropped off the net lately.

    Her work on authoritarian groups and how to deal with them are still some of the best writing on that I've run across - and absolutely vital if you want insight into the conservative mind.

    "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

    by xaxnar on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 07:05:10 PM PDT

  •  Excellent (12+ / 0-)

    The strength of women is the strength of humanity

    This

    They got full economic and social control over our bodies, our labor, our affections, and our futures. They got to make the rules, name the gods we would worship, and dictate the terms we would live under. In most cultures, they had the right to sex on demand within the marriage, and also to break their marriage vows with impunity — a luxury that would get women banished or killed. As long as pregnancy remained the defining fact of our lives, they got to run the whole show. The world was their party, and they had a fabulous time.
    has hobbled us immeasurably.

    There are tumults to come, no doubt, but half of our race has been keeping the other half under their boots.

    The end of that despicable arrangement makes us TWICE what we were. And once the convulsions subside we might actually be able to get some work done.

    Thanks tk

  •  Thank you (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    teacherken, LSophia, Smoh, akmk

    I didn't see it the first time around. Well said.

    Why yes there is a war on women and minorities.

    by karma5230 on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 07:32:46 PM PDT

  •  The conservative majority of this SCOTUS (9+ / 0-)

    Has many nefarious goals, all of them dangerous.

    They want to keep the poor and minorities under the thumb of wealthier people and whites

    They want to shower corporations and very wealthy individuals with outsize power in elections, workplace rules and government

    They want to return women to the subservient role of brood mares and meek supporters of their husbands

    They want to bring down the President at any price

    "It ain't right, Atticus," said Jem. "No, son, it ain't right." --Harper Lee, To Kill a Mockingbird

    by SottoVoce on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 07:35:32 PM PDT

    •  Exactly. very Sad (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LSophia, SuWho, akmk

      "What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them." -- Pres. Obama (1/20/2009)

      by zizi on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 08:05:34 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Senate Dems Refuse to Use Filibuster (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Smoh, Teiresias70, fou, akmk

      Against Alito-- Why?

      Judiciary Committee member Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) said, "I do not see a likelihood of a filibuster. This might be a man I disagree with, but it doesn't mean he shouldn't be on the court."
      She then changed her mind and voted "No" for cloture, but it didn't matter since Alito was confirmed.

      If these lifer democrats in the Senate can't recognize and block a nominee like Alito, what good are they?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/...

      "We are beyond law, which is not unusual for an empire; unfortunately, we are also beyond common sense." Gore Vidal

      by Superpole on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 06:17:53 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  They probably didn't have a Crystal Ball to see (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        white blitz

        the future to know how bad it actually would be...but, yeah, good point.

        It's to Obama's credit that he was able to get Sotomayor and Kagen confirmed.  Excellent choices.

        With their controls on the purse, i worry about damage US House could do without a strong Democratic Senate and a strong Democratic President.

  •  They faint at the thought that women can (8+ / 0-)

    control their own sexuality. It's all about controlling women. They fear us. They fear our sexuality.

    One wing-nut said birth control is all about sex without consequences. Consequences for men have always been minimal. The lack of containment of consequences for women is what scares them.

    •  I think it goes beyond sex (7+ / 0-)

      They fear what we can do -- the competition we become -- when we are no longer tied by our biology to home and kids.

      A few months ago, I saw a thing on a right-wing men's site that pointed out that before women entered the workforce, every workplace was basically a men's locker room. Men could be crude and gross, tease each other and make blue jokes, harass the female secretaries, often drink on the job, and otherwise be Just Guys, in the way men are when they're alone together. I think "Mad Men" really brought this home -- the casual sexism, the frat-house clutchbutt and grabass. This was what workplaces were like, and a lot of men really liked it that way.

      But all that changed when women showed up. We are making them shape up, clean up their act, play fair, keep their hands to themselves, and generally behave. And they hate it, just like 10-year-old boys hate it when girls try to get into the treehouse or Mom makes them clean up their rooms.

      Worse: the amount of competition they face has now doubled. Not only have we changed the game; increasingly we are winning it, too.

      It's not going down well, and a lot of guys are really pissed off about it. (Personally, I think this a big part of what the emergence of what I think of as Stupid Gun Culture is about, too. I grew up in gun culture, but it was very very different when I was a kid -- not remotely as fetishy and political as the NRA has made it now.)

      •  Grieving (and raging) at the loss of privilege (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SuWho, Liberal Granny

        What you said is very, very true.

        I have been pondering this for some time, and I think what we are seeing is, in large part, their grief and rage at losing unearned privileges.

        One hundred years ago years ago, men had enormous, unearned privileges just by virtue of having been born male. They - for all intents and purposes - ran the world.  They were the presidents, senators, doctors, lawyers, dictators, priests, bishops, supervisors, bank presidents....

        Women were secretaries, nurses, teachers, librarians - or, most often - wives.

        Men could run the show at home.  The lives of their wives and children were completely structured around them.  If the man's job meant that the family needed to move, they moved.  Married men were - largely - guaranteed a supportive, helpful someone who would provide them with house-cleaning services, a supportive ear, meals cooked on demand, to their liking, sex on demand, someone to rear and nurture their children.  All they had to do is work and bring home a paycheck.  

        No matter how bad things got, they were still kings of their own particular castles - and it was in their wives' best interests to help them, as they rose and fell together.

        As your article points out, if a woman had any special passions or gifts or artistry that continued to flourish despite these expectations, she had to manage it in concert with her other duties, which, more often than not, meant putting herself last - way last.

        Many, many men do "get it."  They like having partners.  They like spending more time with their children.  They like not having the survival of the family placed solely on their shoulders and are willing to pitch in and do their share of domestic duties.

        But for others, this is an indescribable affront.  They want what their fathers and grandfathers had.  They refuse to see women as people, and think there is something intrinsically disordered in doing so.  In their minds, women were literally created to serve men and our recent rise to power, freedom and agency flies in the face of the very social order.

        A similar arc takes plays with regard for the emergence of minorities.

        These "traditionalist" men also know that - in most circles - it's considered low-rent to grieve about being denied the right to oppress people (women and minorities) any more.  So, a lot of this stuff goes unvoiced, or comes out in weird little ways.  But, believe me, it's in there.

      •  Yes, but... Please read "Do Republican Men ever (0+ / 0-)

        Have Sex" diary posted today on front page. Thank you for your thoughtful comments.

  •  Seems too easy (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LSophia, happymisanthropy

    It seems like after a while, we'll all just be forced to become llc's or when won't get the same rights as others.  

    Streichholzschächtelchen

    by otto on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 07:55:42 PM PDT

  •  Somewhere (5+ / 0-)

    buried in the many volumes of history the Durant's wrote - I think it is in their book on the Reformation written in 1951. they note the increasing delay between when humans are ready to be sexually active and when they are able to become economically independent.  This increasing gap would serve, they predicted,  to inevitably weaken and destroy many taboos around premarital sex.

    It is one thing to be a virgin when you marry at 13.  It is quite another when you are 24.  The Durant's explanation for the sexual revolution - offered before it occurred - has always stuck me as the most likely.  After all, condoms have existed for centuries.  

    Politicians - "You can't be a pimp and a prostitute too"

    by fladem on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 07:58:51 PM PDT

  •  Gardner in Colorado wants to ban contraception (7+ / 0-)

    If Udall can't win on that issue alone, he and his campaign are completely and utterly incompetent.

  •  Yes, but it's about a lot more than just this. (7+ / 0-)

    Simply put, it's about dominance, period.  Everything you write and present is true, and that's why it's important.  It's a rallying cry for the men who want to return to a patriarchal world and a rallying cry for those who want to stop them.  It's an emotional jackpot!

    But it's also a huge distraction from the ongoing march to making all of us irrelevant.  They want everything. They've almost got it.  But they want to be sure we can't take it back ever again.

    America, where a rising tide lifts all boats! Unless you don't have a boat...uh...then it lifts all who can swim! Er, uh...um...and if you can't swim? SHAME ON YOU!

    by Back In Blue on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 08:16:47 PM PDT

  •  One of the great qualities of great writers (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SuWho, white blitz

    ( which includes you ) is that they are quick to recognize great ideas even when other people express them first.

    This is how true progress occurs.

    Congratulations on another excellent posting

  •  The Christian Right's war on gays is corollary... (8+ / 0-)

    ...to their principal mission to dominate women.

    Fundies of all faiths are antagonistic towards gays because:

    A. They're not "doing their duty" to marry, procreate and "increase the flock" for the church.

    B. Gay marriages are dangerous examples of relationships with a purpose other than procreation. Egalitarian, loving and supportive commitment without child-bearing is a dire threat to the Patriarchy. It leads young women to question the rules that "traditional marriage" imposes on them.

    “It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing
    he was never reasoned into” - Jonathan Swift

    by jjohnjj on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 10:10:40 PM PDT

  •  The GOP are assuring their own demise (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sychotic1, akmk

    Their stark anti-contraception campaign will impact low income earners far more than women or couples who fare better economically. Furthermore, their efforts to ban all means of abortion will also unfairly impact women of lower socioeconomic status who cannot afford birth control. These two factors will only help ensure a greater proportion of children born in need of public assistance. Furthermore, these children will grow up seeing first hand the importance of these programs, and because many of them will also be minorities, we can be assured that the future for Democrats and liberals looks very, very bright... particularly in the red states.

    The church is likely also sealing it's own fate. We're already seeing that in record numbers of young who are fleeing religion after witnessing the racism, bigotry, misogyny, and hate being generated by many of the major organized religions of the world. Furthermore, the blatant denial of scientific fact and reasoning  by many of these religions is becoming more and more obvious to an increasingly wary and already skeptical by the young. I'm putting all of my faith in my young daughter's generation and giving up on my Father's "FOX-worshipping" generation (my apologies to the sane rational septagenuarians on this site)

    "A mind is like a parachute. It doesn’t work if it isn’t open." - Frank Zappa

    by macleme on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 10:20:44 PM PDT

  •  well the issue is not cultural, it's political, a (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    saluda

    Court doesn't get to set the lawmaking agenda in our system. Laws stay on the books even if there is a doubt that they are unconstitutional (Ogden), and also they can't be touched if they are political in nature, say elections cases (Luther v Borden). In a democracy the elected branches make the laws. The constitutional system of separation of powers was overthrown by the Court. Comments here reflect acquiescence to judicial supremacy because of resignation about the efficacy of democracy. The GOP still gets to dismantle the republic through its Court and propaganda system, only because the Dems will not be Dems.

    The fundamental principle of Dem politics since FDR is legislative revolution supported by the electorate. To care so much about what the Court says, or follow it down to ruins when it crashes the system, is a mistake that neither Lincoln nor FDR had the luxury to make. Either Congress checks and balances the Court, as is its duty, or you don't have a democracy. This collapse is entirely on the corrupt Dems, by failing to develop a strategy to curb the Court and restore to Congress its Art. 1 powers now under Court occupation. It's as if when Pearl Harbor was bombed, the nation embarked on a crash program to learn Japanese and welcome the new colonial governors.  

    •  The Senate failed its duty in 1805 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Musial, saluda

      when it failed to convict and remove Samuel Chase from the Supreme Court.

      That meant, in practice, that no other Supreme Court judge could be impeached for anything, ever.

      If it's
      Not your body,
      Then it's
      Not your choice
      And it's
      None of your damn business!

      by TheOtherMaven on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 03:23:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  it's all in Congress's hands, look at the House, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite

        the most democratic of the constitutional institutions has been captured. Elections for the House would be the most vital emergency. As Breyer said in McCutcheon free speech has been cut off. But it's not just a communication issue that a corrupt system causes, the electorate is the sovereign, it's the equivalent of checkmate in our system. Congress could develop a separate inquiry under the good behavior clause to remove justices found by national referendum to have violated the separation of powers in cases challenged by Congress by remonstrance. Dems fear democracy because money in politics makes it seem that the electorate is insane. But democracy recovers its sanity in the act of getting money out of politics, by the electorate, as single issue voters, forcing Congress to do it or else, and by stripping the Court of pretended jurisdiction to review the law.

        •  Plutochlocracy (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          snwflk

          Ochlocracy is government by the ignorant mob.
          Plutocracy is government by money.
          I have invented this new word, to mean government by a mob kept ignorant by the power of money to control the information media.

          I sincerely hope that the Internet will continue to be reasonably free from plutocracy.

  •  All men and all Catholic (4+ / 0-)

    Justices for Hobby Lobby photo hobby_lobby_usa_zpsca2c35f8.jpg

    And IMO the worst kind of Catholic.

    And some archbishops (let alone plain bishops) have issues;

    US: Anti-gay Archbishop investigated over new allegations he ‘sexually touched’ men

    Daily Kos an oasis of truth. Truth that leads to action.

    by Shockwave on Wed Jul 02, 2014 at 10:41:13 PM PDT

    •  Papists. Imposing Catholicism on America. (0+ / 0-)
    •  Worse Yet (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      snwflk

      Four of them are members of an association that calls itself  Opus Dei -- the Work of God, and therefore ought to be suspected of divided loyalty, since the patron of that association is a foreignPower that was, quite recently, in a Concordat with our Nazi enemies.

      •  Opus Dei is an ultra-conservative fringe organizat (0+ / 0-)

        ion based in DC that unabashedly sells itself as that Horde Who Are The Preservers Of The Purity and Essence of Catholicism. Unbelievable! Wonder if those who appointed these self-styled guardians knew what good catholics they are?

    •  I did not realize that all five within this Unholy (0+ / 0-)

      Alliance of Goons are catholic. Makes everything even more egregious.   Pandering to Holy Mother Church and His Holiness The Supreme Pontiff vastly increases the suckiness factor. Ewww.... Ah, yes, now I see it. Alito is even gazing heavenward with an aura of sanctimony so excessive it rivals the days when crusaders murdered for God. Roberts looks his usual smug self, Kennedy looks rather abashed and well, Thomas and Scalia have always had an air of churlishness emanating from their dopey visages.

  •  Already lost that battle (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fou, akmk, white blitz

    Lost it in 2010.  Regardless of what happens, access to "contraceptive" care is a done deal.  Lost the runner up match,  too, since 1) paying for preventive care reduces overall costs and 2) the overwhelming majority of insuring bodies know it.  Right now, the fight is over the consolation prize, which is the right to be pedantic about saying you're not paying for something you're obviously--in one way or another--going to pay for.

    •  Well, yes. Thanks for that perspective. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      rduran

      Citizens in the US who are paying attention now have much greater insight into who is looking out for whose interests on SCOTUS and will hopefully be voting en masse and appropriately as a result.

  •  Given the state of current affairs, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    white blitz

    I'd be perfectly fine with women running things.

    So endith the trick.

    by itsjim on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 06:10:29 AM PDT

    •  depends upon the women (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, SuWho, beyondbeyond, white blitz

      before you say that consider the following

      Just consider the Michelles - Malkin, Bachmann and Rhee

      or the Cheneys, Lynne and Liz

      Anne Coulter

      Carly Fiorina

      Sarah Palin

      Marsha Blackburn

      Virginia Foxx

      Meghan Kelly of Fox News

      and those are just the names that popped up in 30 seconds

      "Don't ask what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive and go do it, because what the world needs is more people who have come alive." - Howard Thurman

      by teacherken on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 06:52:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Of course. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SuWho

        My comment was intended to show support for breaking down the patriarchy. There are good men and bad, there are good women and bad. The women I had in mind were more along the lines of Jennifer Granholm, Elizabeth Warren and Debbie Wasserman Schultz.

        So endith the trick.

        by itsjim on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 07:59:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks Ken. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    teacherken, BlueDragon, SuWho

    One thing I can tell you for sure: if I ever have children, when they reach the appropriate age I'm going to offer both this diary and Sara Robinson's piece for considered reading.

  •  often the most brilliant insights (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LSophia, SuWho

    are the most obvious. young women today do not understand what they might lose and why the world is different for them.

  •  Well done, Ken, illustrating the some guys (0+ / 0-)

    actually do get it.

  •  Don't ignore that fact that once women control (0+ / 0-)

    childbearing, they take away ego props of the male who can force sex and thus pregnancy and can claim solely for themselves the stature as the highest branch of the family tree.

    With BC men become very much second fiddle as the patriarch of their family line, in which they are lord and everyone else is a vassal, slave, dependent, or whatever derogatory terms are used.

    Granted that is an exaggeration, and scientifically inaccurate,  but if women can control the biologically most important reason for mating, they control a lot.  The male is not longer the sole master of his domain.

    For whatever reason being master rather than partner in a relationship is important to a lot of guys.  What they don't get is that having one friend at home who is always there for him is a damn good deal and worth forfeiting some ego to gain.

    •  Good for Nuthin (0+ / 0-)

      "Men are good for nuthin, I never saw a good one yet"
      is an expression of exasperation probably brought on by the stupidity of a system that doesn't understand fiendship, partnership, and co-operation.

      I do not think that polygamous herd animal males are happier than songbird cocks, which are usually at least apparently monogamous.
      DNA analysis has revealed that, unlike perfect humans, songbird females in some instances prove to have laid eggs fertilised by birds not their spouses.

    •  @ Marnie1 (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      snwflk

      Even as a guy, I don't get it either.  Just simply on the basis of 'two heads are better than one'.  A partnership means having to make an argument on the merits.  Of course, both partners need to have enough good judgement to know which one has the better idea.  Not always an easy find.

      But there's another reason why we need to dampen that male 'ego prop' in the modern era: it reinforces the male territorial instinct.  And to the extent that maps out onto state policy on everthing from healthcare, to domestic security, to military conflict, birth control can be seen as almost a necessity for representative democracies to navigate a dangerous moment in human history, where we have the capacity to self-annihilate on a mistake involving the male ego.  The hope is that women, in our public institutions, will turn out to be moderating influences on testosterone-fueled men, when push comes to shove.

  •  There are aspects of the article that was used (0+ / 0-)

    in this diary that are wrong. It is only since the advent of patriarchal religions and societies that women have been placed in a subjugated role. Before that time, many cultures were matriarchal based, where the deities were predominantly female and the government was run by women. Several Native American tribes were matriarchal based before the whites came here but quickly changed to patriarchal based because the white men refused to accept women as the spokespeople for their tribes.

    We also had birth control back then, administered through herbal concoctions either to prevent pregnancy or to abort a fetus. Birth control in this country was abolished in early 1800's and then re-emerged in the late 1800's. We have only had access to modern birth control methods since the early 1950's for married women and since 1972 for all women.

    Life... is like a grapefruit. It's orange and squishy, and has a few pips in it, and some folks have half a one for breakfast. -Douglas Adams

    by mahytabel on Thu Jul 03, 2014 at 10:43:48 PM PDT

    •  Matriarchal Societies (0+ / 0-)

      I have read that one reason why "everybody that was anybody" in ancient days was "born of a virgin", was that in a matriarchal society a high-born woman could take any lover she fancied, and was under no compulsion to divulge their names.
      Conceivably, indeed, she might not be entirely certain of the identity of the sire of a particular child.

  •  Not just Catholic priests. (0+ / 0-)

    There is a very long list of Protestant clergy doing the same things as Catholic priests.

    It seems that the Catholic church gets all the press (possibly because they have more money than Protestant denominations and churches).

    http://www.reformation.com (Long list of court cases involving sex crimes by Protestant clergy in the USA)

    "A Conservative is a fellow who is standing athwart history yelling 'Stop!'"—William F. Buckley, Jr.—Founder of the conservative policy magazine "National Review"

    by Village Vet on Fri Jul 04, 2014 at 12:42:48 AM PDT

  •  All true, but... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    snwflk

    More important than adherence to their primitive religious doctrines, the grand poobahs of proselytizing religions also need to expand their bases, especially in these times when fundamentalists of all stripes are actively competing for control over vapid minds.

    Stifling the advancement and dignity of women in the process is simply a twofer in their eyes.

  •  The women of Ancient Egypt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    snwflk

    were quite well acquainted with birth control methods and were in charge of their bodies in a time when the pantheon of deities included a healthy mix of male and female with the Great Mothers (Isis, etc.) being revered and at the top of the hierarchy.   What happened?  A shift toward male-centric religion and authority happened, culminating in Christianity and then Islam.  The misogynist religions are most definitely to blame for the current plight of women, and therefore children and the rest of us, in the world today.

    “Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise.... During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What have been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.” ― James Madison, A Memorial and Remonstrance, on the Religious Rights of Man: Written in 1784-85

    •  The KKK can be an advantage (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      snwflk

      As long as the three K's are a valid reference for the last time a state attempted to deny the ability of science and technology to enable more fulfilled lives, it should absolutely be used against them, as often as possible, as a matter of ethics, morals, and state policy.  If you're speaking to audiences, don't be afraid to bring the topic up.  Don't actually use the word 'Nazi', but make allusions strong enough so that anyone who wants to know will find it easy to discover the connection.  

      For example: "My father/friend/brother fought a war against a regime that told their woman how to live and how to behave.  And removing the ability for women to make their own decisions about their bodies was how it was done.  It was social engineering as state policy. When choice is state policy, it affirms a faith in the individual and his or her freedom to make informed choices.  That is the essence of democracy.  When choice is removed by state policy, it is, by definition, disrespecting the individual, it disrespects their freedom, and it disrespects their liberty.  That's the distinction between a policy of choice, and a policy of restriction, when it comes to medicine and healthcare.  And claiming that an embryo has the same rights of choice as an adult female is simply convenient sophistry by outsiders that seek to speak in its place.  The embryo has no voice other than what the mother, carrying it in her very womb, claims it is.  To suggest otherwise is definitely not conservative, and certainly anti-liberty.  Any political party that advocates restricting or removing safe, accepted, medical choices for women, is effectively not a party of liberty, and certainly not a party of freedom.  And that, my friends, is not American, and quite frankly, never has been.  This isn't about birth control.  This isn't about family planning.  This is nothing less than social engineering, by men, and for men.  And it has to stop.  And with our votes, it WILL stop!"

  •  thanks for reposting this (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    snwflk

    I appreciate your thoughtful, clear presentation combined with Ms. Robinson's analysis, and I completely agree with it.  

     

  •  100 years from now (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    snwflk

    A couple of things wrong with Sara's otherwise correct viewpoint:

    The Moon shot was an expensive but scientifically trifling exercise. It was propaganda. Voyager was far more significant.
    Human exploration of space, if it ever happens, will require fuel sources a milliontimes more compact than chemical propellants. We already power the instruments of our longest-lived robot space observers with the energy of radioactive materials.
    If we do not learn how not to ruin our own planet, we've no right to go to others.

    The issue of contraception needs to be settled long before the world population doubles again. It's already more than double what it was at the time of the Cuban Missile Crisis, 52 years ago.
    That, and Human Climate Degradation, are now the worst problems facing humanity.
    Nuclear war is a distant third, unless indeed it comes fourth after religious fervor
    Overpopulation is the ultimate enemy of liberty for the "teeming masses". Possibly it suits their ecclesiastical and other overlords.

  •  OK to prevent Death (0+ / 0-)

    The first institutions to object to an obligation that they provide their clients with a birth-prevention option, were hospitals run by Roman Catholics.
    How can it me less moral to interfere with God's intention that a human ovum to be supplied with a horde of sperm than His intention that  a given patient should die?
    The reason for the probably catastrophic multiplication of our species is the imbalance between the birth rate and the death rate in children not yet of sexually fertile age.
    Not having a high child mortality is a good thing, but the obvious price to pay is contraception.

    •  some words from a Catholic priest (0+ / 0-)

      Father Leo, who ran the program in Pastoral Counseling at Lasalle U in Philadelphia in which I was briefly enrolled and from which my Mother-in-Law got her masters.  He said that there was a logical socialogical reason for the Church to want to encourage large families, because in primitive agricultural societies it took the work of 10 people to produce enough food to feed 11.  Also, children were one's Social Security - when one could no longer work having some living children enable you to be provided for.  He further said that the calcification of doctrine was an unfortunate part of the ways humans operate, when the original sensible reason for a policy changed, people would go through all sorts of hoops and contortions to justify its continuation.

      Thus in Judaism, the original ban against eating of pork, which may have been to prevent against getting trichinosis, continued as a mark of separation.  IIRC even Maimonides commented upon the disease-prevention basis of the ban.   There was the further justification that of domestic animals only the pig gave no benefit while alive, and Judaism in general has a ban on unnecessary killing, which is why in general Jews are not hunters.  

      "Don't ask what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive and go do it, because what the world needs is more people who have come alive." - Howard Thurman

      by teacherken on Mon Jul 07, 2014 at 04:20:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  For more on Nazi "Kinder, Kuche und Kirche" policy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    snwflk

    see the great trilogy on the Third Reich by Professor Richard Evans, especially the middle volume, "The Third Reich in Power."

    The Nazis were concerned with sexual liberation not only as a cynical political ploy to appeal to more traditional, so-called "Real Germans."  It certainly was that too.  However, it was also a reaction to the declining birth rate, which the Nazis reckoned would imperil their purposes, especially the capacity for aggressive war-making. They wanted to breed an army.

    The reactionaries the diarist describes might well be inclined to breed an army for much the same reasons (though where Hitler seems to have done so more for political power and ego, people today often ride the military-spending gravy train simply for money). However, I suppose I'll leave it to later historians to decide.

  •  The GOP Goal (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CAzen, snwflk

    is simply, to overturn Roe V Wade, and to remake our society into a Christian Biblical theocracy - like the unruly and cowardly Taliban, they wish to enslave and create a mecca for their men. Christianity is the same. The Christians, the Muslims and the Communists all proselytize, nice goal but have they not made a mess of the whole thing?
    Yes they have and to allow them to continue will be a tragedy.

  •  Another scrap of supporting evidence: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    snwflk

    on almost any YouTube video featuring women athletes, especially female bodybuilders, you'll find some idiot commenting "That's a strange-looking kitchen."

    For the Nazis, the role of women was defined as Kinder, Kirche, Kuche -  kids, church and kitchen.  For too many patriarchal males today, that phraseology still seems to represent their thinking.
    The spiritual heirs of the Nazis are all over YouTube today.
    •  Or when any woman appears (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ridovem

      in any medium, and she is not under 25, a size 00, and "hot," immediately, the haters crawl out from under their rocks.

      Our award-winning female lead broadcaster just retired at the unheard-of age of 70, and, invariably, some idiot posted on Facebook or in the comments section, deriding her "turkey neck."  

      As if women only exist to serve them or bring them pleasure.

      •  Ny wife is now 57 (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        LSophia

        she has survived a bout with a cancer - now in remission

        she is now back at about the weight she was when we got married in 1985

        no, her flesh is not as tight as it was when we first went out in 1974. Neither is mine - I am 68, and have struggled first to take off 30 pounds and to keep it off.  I have to work to build up the strength and flexibility I lost.  I have far less hair, am missing some teeth with the other worn down.  She still for some reason thinks I'm hot.   I think she's smoking.

        And a man who thinks a woman only exist to serve him or bring him pleasure is actually missing most of what a loving woman really gives him.

        "Don't ask what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive and go do it, because what the world needs is more people who have come alive." - Howard Thurman

        by teacherken on Mon Jul 07, 2014 at 04:24:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Conservatives (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    snwflk

    Our little dictators.

  •  Battle over Birth Control (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    snwflk

    Immigrants come to this country and adjust to major changes. Women entered the professional fields and adjusted to major changes, People of color in this country deal with hate and intolerance and succeed. The highest court with the most educated males is unable to adapt to change. Darwin said a species that can not adapt becomes extinct.

  •  The imposed will of a few on the many is not de... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CAzen, snwflk

    The imposed will of a few on the many is not democracy...

  •  Birth Control (0+ / 0-)

    And when we come to the Halls of Power at last, we will bring with us:
                                                 Community

  •  Dominance (0+ / 0-)

    I fail to even understand why one gender needs to have dominance over the other.  Are we not all created equal in the eyes of God?  Are we not all human beings?  We each have been given a different role to play out in this 3-D reality but those different roles should not allow one to dominate the other.  What do these men fear from women?  Why is it so important to them that they are the dominant gender?  I grew up with the phrase, barefoot and pregnant and it seems that's the way some men prefer women to be.  It is time for the genders to call a truce and come together to realize that we each have something to offer the other.  The church's likewise need to realize that Jesus never called for men to rule over women, in fact just the opposite.

  •  There is another front in this battle (0+ / 0-)

    And women are missing it.  Or in many cases cooperating with it.  That is the reconciliation, if possible, between the freedom woman gain from male dominance with contraception in all other parts of life and society, which is social vs. the dominant male/submissive female role in the sex act, which is biological.  This is not going to be easy, and right now it is going the wrong way.  Fast.  Especially commercially, and especially in media.  When I see weekly ads in a liberal alt newspaper from a supposedly feminist sex toy shops for classes on anal and BDSM, which appear to be well attended, mostly by women, it’s obvious many women enjoy the submissive sex role.  And are being encouraged to do so.  It is not a mistake that sex is equated with rape in Game of Thrones.  I sent an e-mail to George R R Martin about an invasion by females warriors who reversed sex practices, using torture, also very much in evidence in GOT, to obtain male performance.  Baby, you’ve come a long way, at least you’re not getting raped.

    The same males who are terrified by the other changes in society are, unconsciously in many cases, terrified of this also, this is their last refuge of masculinity.

    Can we change it?  Who knows?  But at least talking about it, or even admitting it, by both genders, is a start.

  •  Culture (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    snwflk

    Despite being modern is many things the country is in it's roots way behind the curve. When it comes to anything social the country is stuck in the 19th century. Sure, there was Woodstock, there were the hippies, Rock'n Roll, and so on. Those were short lived revolts that did not change a thing.

    US people still lack tolerance and respect for others. The root may be the arrogance of the "American exceptionalism" which prevents learning from others and accepting others in the way they are.

    The general population made a big jump when it comes to the rights of the LGBT folks. The so called conservatives do not have much to say about this change so they go back into history and try to control women like in the "good old times".

  •  Freedom- individual liberty; equal right under law (0+ / 0-)

    APPLAUSE

    You nailed it.

  •  Thank you, teacherken! (0+ / 0-)

    You're so right--Sara Robinson gets it and says it. Brilliant.

    Strong memory from my college days (around 1969-1971)--a popular, well-designed, full-impact poster featuring the profile image of a man with a very round belly:
    "If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament."

    We had it hanging up in a prominent place in our small apt--I think I still have it saved somewhere. Should get it framed and put up again, because--
    It seems this fight is still going on, getting more vicious, and will most likely continue long into this century, if not more.
    Sigh.

    •  I remember that! (0+ / 0-)

      I remember that poster!  I think the one that hung in my DOCTORS office had slightly different wording but the same intent!

      And you prob remember the FIRST newsprint volume of "Our Bodies Ourselves"--WHERE is this today?  

      Where is the sense of discovery and "We are all in this together"--today????

  •  Very eloquent, teacherken, it truly does cover the (0+ / 0-)

    entire battle and what it is we are rallying so vehemently against. I could not have said it nearly so cogently and concisely. But I do say here that because it sums it all up so perfectly I do not feel there is any more need to read any of the other far more mediocre articles and diatribes that have emerged due to the stupidity, dishonesty, hubris and banality of five very frightened and backward-thinking men. They do not deserve to have their names in print, not even one more time. Because truly speaking, that is fundamentally the only thing they care about.

  •  Birth control and abortion (0+ / 0-)

    It is curious that politicians who would prohibit abortion and even some kinds of birth control claim to be motivated by "reverence for life."  Yet once that sacred life pops out of the womb, it is quite permissible to let it starve if it is poor, suffer or die of treatable diseases if it can't afford health care.  It is acceptable to slaughter it on the battlefield, even in wars of choice, or execute it if it commits certain crimes.  Heck, even before the "sacred life" is born, they won't support prenatal care, thus allowing scared lives to perish in the womb.  

    So, what is the real driving force for the "Pro Life" politicians?  Is it a mythical abortion slut, analogous to the welfare queen they screamed about a few years ago. even though neither of these demons may exist in statistically insignificant numbers?  

  •  God meant for us to have sex for fun (0+ / 0-)

    To all that claim birth control is against their religion because we are suppose to be making babies not having sex because we enjoy  
    IF GOD HAD INTENDED FOR HUMANS TO ONLY HAVE SEX TO MAKE BABIES, WOMEN WOULD ONLY WANT TO HAVE SEX ONCE A YEAR AND MEN WOULD ONLY BE ABLE TO HAVE AN ERECTION  WHEN IT WAS TIME TO MAKE A BABY.
    Humans are the only creation of God that can have sex when they want it . We are his only creation that can have sex every day or more than once a day in some cases.
     God's other creations that reproduce can only have sex when  the females go into heat, that is the only time she will allow male of species to have sex with her, and   for some species that means they only have sex once in their lifetime or once every nine years.
    God created us in away that we can show our love for each other using sex to do so when ever we wanted to do so, not just make babies.

    REGISTER AND VOTE NOVEMBER 2014

    •  God's creative abilities (0+ / 0-)

      Given the number of fetal deformities including the lack of a brain, it is only apparent that if God creates life he is either incompetent or cruel in efforts.

      However, God doesn't create life; it is a natural biological process. Good nutrition and adequate amounts of folic acid can reduce the number of deformities and neural abnormalities.

      Of course adequate female nutrition during pregnancy is a anti-Christian communist plot to perpetuate big government intrusion into personal choice.

  •  It still amazes me that (0+ / 0-)

    some men seem to think that it only takes a woman to make a baby; that men have no responsibility in the effort.

    What's up with THAT?

  •  Watch Freakonomics (0+ / 0-)

    Watch Freakonomics

  •  The real reason (0+ / 0-)

    why white conservative Republicans are against the pill is because white women are not having babies.
    I was told by a very conservative Republican who is very political that if white women do not start back having babies minorities will have the majority of the voters much sooner than anticipated. He informed me that this is what they talk about in the back rooms and it is very concerning and they are going to do everything they can to make sure that white women have more children.
    Now that we see what is happening, even the Supreme Court is involved, it makes sense.

  •  Battle of Birth Control (0+ / 0-)

    The real, but unconscious, issue is that the Y chromosome is not essential for reproduction. Women have 2 XX chromosomes, and males have an XY chromosome; there are other combinations of X and Y, but there is no viable YY combination.

    It is likely that the Y chromosome will disappear over time and given the violence associated with testosterone in males, society will at some point decide that perpetuating the Y chromosome will not be worth it.

    Love and social bonding is associated with the neuropeptide oxytocin which is produced at the time of giving birth to stimulate the emotional attachment of the mother with her new born. There are other effects of oxytocin, and it is the basis of same sex affiliation as well as heterosexual affiliation.

    When women are in complete control of their reproductive responsibility, testosterone (and its associated violence) and the Y chromosome will fade into biological extinction and the female nurturing biology will extend into the biosphere to preserve life on planet earth.

    •  Please don't make this against men in general (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      ridovem

      This whole birth control issue, while it IS about control over women, should never, ever turn into an anti-male issue.

      It's not about men, even though it's about some men. But women DO have to unite, as we did in the 1970's, to empower ourselves. Vote out the bad ones, don't worship at churches where the religion strongly and obviously values males over females, and eject from your life those forces that reject you if you are female.

      No one will do the empowering for us; we must do it for ourselves, every woman for all women!

    •  Women have some testosterone in their systems (0+ / 0-)

      It isn't only 'that' which makes society 'unequal'.
      There's some built-in factor that connects the Y chromosome and "physical attractiveness" in an inverse way... ie female humans are the "beautiful" members in our species. With birds it's the males. In both cases, the "beautiful" ones are designed to attract the attention of the other, plainer gender, which (it turns out) are the ones bearing the Y chromosome.

      Maybe the Y chromosome will disappear... and humans can become more like gregarious insects... with a worshipful (and hard-working) coterie who dote upon the Queen, and the output of her ovaries... and a population almost entirely of females, whose capabilities are unquestioned. We COULD go there, eventually... since Nature seems always willing to try new things, and variations on the "tried-and-true", as well.  ^..^
       

      PEACE?.. where's the money in THAT?
  •  Well said (0+ / 0-)

    But voting is the only way to make it work. We jn the center must come out of hiding and vote for fairness.
    I still believe that there are more fair and reasonable people in the USA then the crazy right. The right made voting work for them. it is time to take the vote back. Even the states that are completely gone have many people who are wanting the right to go away. Turn off FOX and think positively. If you feel unsafe going to vote go with friends in a group. I go vote early to a remote place where no one knows me and I do not have to face my crazy foaming at the mouth neighbors.  Get the right papers - Register to Vote - VOTE - VOTE    
    I know it is hard but you must or we are lost. And our children will be slaves.

  •  men and sex : (0+ / 0-)

    Well - the real truth is that women don't actually NEED men at all - we know how to fix our urges ourselves, can do almost any job a man can do, are equally smart, have a lot of talents they often lack, and really only need to use their muscles to haul large loads etc !!
    So now that we realize that, I often amuse myself thinking of the concept of a mainly female society existing with a few 'pods' of males kept in special places for pleasure and
    troops of muscly males kept for heavy lifting......this then leads to the  realization that this is the exact opposite of what they have been doing to us for all these years ..... prostitutes in brothels 'for their pleasure'.....demanding that we just fulfill what they see as our God-given purpose to them !!!!!  
    Sometimes I actually hate them (mainly due to my ex-husband's behavior over the years)...then I spend time with my lovely boys who all grew up to be caring, thoughtful males and I have hope for the future !!
    Just watch out...we girls COULD plan quite a change in society if you now try to put us back in our old boxes !!!

  •  Control freak卐 (0+ / 0-)

    For the last 2000 years, the oligarchs, conservatives and western religions have been obsessed with control over women.
    It's something they get from birth, dominate Neanderthal DNA, the psychopath genes.
    Most humans have the superior intellect to control these primitive genes.
    In Europe the warrior paleo-ethnic races have about 6% primitive Neanderthal DNA.
    This led to thousands of years of rampaging European neo caveman, they just want to rule the world.
    Worldwide the decedents of more civilized early humans have 1%-3% primitive DNA.
    Give evolution a couple thousand more years and these scattered vestiges of pre homo-sapiens should be diluted out of the gene pool.
    This will have no effect on republicans, they don't believe in evolution. Can you blame them, evolution has clearly missed these cavemen.

    The American solution is to restore Democracy and Justice. If we can't vote them out,  there are plenty of pitch forks and torches. Your typical bully will back down when confronted with an angry mob.
    So vote if you still can, and vote only for progressives.
    Supporting any local, state or federal member of the republican crime syndicate is like digging your own grave.
    While the GOP and their racist TeaNandertal storm tropperz are digging graves for our children.

  •  Power (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LSophia

    You mean it is all about power. Personal and political power to rule and decide over others. Its older than the Bible and the cause of most of the worlds suffering. To rule or, be ruled, to suffer the at the hands of an oppressor. Religion is the door used in ancient times to control populations with their consent. The problem these days is the consent isn't there anymore but half the country is determine to live in a world that discriminates against those that don't agree with them.

  •  Have you noticed how many corporations and (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LSophia, twocrows1023

    politicians are moving slightly and gradually in the direction of Sharia law---where WOMEN are concerned? Women are either unequally marginalized in health care (but not where Viagra 'health care' is concerned---why isn't THAT med considered 'recreational'?), or Repubs like Rush ridicule women and/or dismiss them as sluts and dummies.

    Women need to stand up, unite and roar to stop this.

    About every quarter century or so, women have to once more slap men upside the head to help them understand again that women aren't 'other.' We DO hold up half the sky. We are not property. We are not 'lesser.'

    Every time women's equality makes a bit of a breakthrough (Anyone remember the fiery oposition to the Equal Rights Amendment in the 1970's?), religious groups are the top oppressing force that shoves women off the ladder to equality and back down to subservience where, of course, she belongs.    

  •  Pregnancy is (0+ / 0-)

    an undesirable side effect of having a fulling sex life.

    If your only  objective of having sex is to get the woman knocked up, you need to get a serious mental examination and extended therapy.

    For me, the only objective of having sex is an earth shaking orgasm for both parties.

  •  Religious men also came up with words like (0+ / 0-)

    whore, slut, bastard and nigger.

    Revolt
    Against
    Patriarchal
    Evolution

    Short of starting a civil war (which men seem to like doing), and the likes of Laura Bush and other lunatic women such as Michele Bachman notwithstanding, right-wing/conservative men have a rude awakening coming in the not so distant future.

    Women Unite!

  •  Sometimes a cigar is juat cigar (0+ / 0-)

    Some good points that I agree with. Especially those in power trying to maintain that power.

    But I think a percentage have no ulterior motives other than believing in the value of human life and are against anything that terminates that life once it begins.

  •  Life without procreation (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    belinda ridgewood

    Childless/Childfree - there's a debate on what to call "it" - so I just stick with procreation - seems better. You've got a few decades on us, we've made the same choice - I'd like to read more about your experiences living a procreation free life thus far. thanks.

  •  Funny, isn't it (0+ / 0-)

    how condoms are not in the Religious Right's sights?  
    Oh, right, men control the situation when condoms are used.  How silly of me - I forgot all about that.

    An IUD and the pill are under the woman's control and the Religious Right can't allow THAT.

    No matter how they bleat about "Right to life" it's all about "Right to control."  If that were not the case, the right-leaning people in Congress wouldn't be slashing WIC or SNAP or Welfare.  

    They're doing the old bait-and-switch, screaming, "It's about life, dammit!" while cutting any programs that allow those children to live even after they've been born.

    So, yes Virginia, it's about control of women and they'll use infants and children to achieve that end.

    The price of apathy is to be ruled by evil men - - Plato . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . We must be the change we wish to see in the world - - Mohandas Gandhi

    by twocrows1023 on Mon Jul 07, 2014 at 10:37:15 AM PDT

  •  Isn't it interesting? (0+ / 0-)

    That the Catholic Church, who tries to make the rules of millions of people in regards to birth control, is so against a woman being able to control her own body and the number of children she has, and yet is so absent in reports about the number of pedophiles within the church? There have been thousand of priests who have been caught molesting boys; some have been defrocked while others were just moved to another location (I'm sure that cured him!) How many reports have they "handled internally" and no one knew about any of it? In other words, some of the bishops have condoned their behavior and expected prayer to cure them. They are not really against this behavior or they would have done something about it many, many years ago. They would have turned the priests over to the police. And yet, they come out so vehemently against a woman's right to choice! Apparently, if the men do it, it's ok. If a woman does something about her own body, it's against church law! Why is that?

  •  Biblical scholars (0+ / 0-)

    Since the rediscovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls, much about Mother Church has been called into question.  A document has recently appeared that claims to speak of the wife of Jesus, a development that turns the entire Catholic celibacy thing into pure quackery. Bart Ehrman and Elaine Pagels have studied the documents unearthed in the Dead Sea Scrolls,and the show that women were a much more important part of the ancient group that followed Christ than we are told today.  Many leaders of the ancient Church were, indeed, women, women who died as martyrs along with men in the Roman arenas, women who today are refused positions of authority in the Catholic Church, as well as in many Protestant churches.  

Meteor Blades, SME in Seattle, claude, Alumbrados, Superskepticalman, Ed in Montana, Angie in WA State, Sylv, coral, PrahaPartizan, Mogolori, scribeboy, Chi, Radiowalla, Odysseus, jotter, melo, grollen, Gator, Gooserock, Pandora, Powered Grace, NYmom, surfbird007, Emerson, Yoshimi, Shockwave, LynChi, liz, Mlle L, mslat27, celdd, saluda, polecat, azale, windwardguy46, Matilda, Sandia Blanca, wenchacha, jancw, Caneel, dpeifer1949, Bugsby, Bruce The Moose, geordie, eyeswideopen, Babsnc, dionys1, whenwego, ehavenot, macleme, CoolOnion, CalNM, mikidee, Geonomist, chimpy, lorikay4, pedrito, ivote2004, Clues, sngmama, Terre, fumie, Siusaidh, splashy, aitchdee, wader, Tomtech, jdmorg, Redfire, tidalwave1, Getreal1246, psnyder, Miss Jones, johanus, white blitz, exiledfromTN, JimWilson, laughingriver, NYFM, Sychotic1, houyhnhnm, RuralLiberal, lcrp, wordwraith, walkshills, OneCharmingBastard, zerelda, ybruti, mungley, kpelligra, Vicky, ScienceMom, Mosquito Pilot, Leaves on the Current, sebastianguy99, My Philosophy, Gowrie Gal, sb, la motocycliste, historys mysteries, Bluesee, marina, radarlady, Ckntfld, BluejayRN, blueyedace2, JanetT in MD, mjd in florida, Lying eyes, Chinton, democracy inaction, JohnB47, basquebob, dewtx, Kdoug, Left Coast Resident, Navy Vet Terp, reflectionsv37, Byrnt, fixxit, eru, PSzymeczek, cfk, SaraBeth, Pam from Calif, Sun Tzu, where4art, lotlizard, PinHole, brentut5, petestern, Blu Gal in DE, FindingMyVoice, itsjim, turdraker, Rogneid, laurel g 15942, peacestpete, Ekaterin, littlewren, kkjohnson, Alan Arizona, kathny, xaxnar, begone, martini, third Party please, esquimaux, Captain Sham, Patriot Daily News Clearinghouse, myboo, Kingsmeg, vigilant meerkat, Mr Bojangles, edwardssl, BlueInARedState, emeraldmaiden, Themistoclea, cookseytalbott, Prognosticator, deha, arlene, anastasia p, fou, blueoasis, bren, wild hair, Rosaura, uniqity, real world chick, JVolvo, MarciaJ720, oakroyd, Turbonerd, onionjim, MadMs, lynneinfla, shaharazade, Statusquomustgo, NancyWH, kurious, jobird, Aaa T Tudeattack, ammasdarling, One Pissed Off Liberal, old wobbly, ERTBen, out of left field, Habitat Vic, Debs2, LSophia, Dartagnan, ColoTim, paz3, gloriana, karmsy, beth meacham, LillithMc, terabytes, Dave in Northridge, HCKAD, SeaTurtle, Moderation, Bridge Master, carpunder, Wreck Smurfy, Joffan, leonard145b, bewild, Assaf, Ralphdog, Empower Ink, gizmo59, JDWolverton, martydd, Amor Y Risa, mconvente, jack 1966, TruthFreedomKindness, JeffW, wayoutinthestix, Sixty Something, Involuntary Exile, NewDealer, bythesea, Fe Bongolan, KJG52, tofumagoo, royce, Hanging Up My Tusks, SottoVoce, ashowboat, petulans, TexanJane, mattc129, get the red out, Parthenia, msdobie, slathe, palantir, Mayfly, billybam, shortgirl, lissablack, statsone, JBL55, Leftleaner, LaFeminista, Fiddlegirl, 207wickedgood, maggiejean, soarbird, bleuet, snackdoodle, greengemini, nchristine, The Dead Man, lilsky, cantelow, mkor7, LibrErica, followyourbliss, TheOpinionGuy, borndem, jomi, papahaha, Denise Oliver Velez, sfarkash, 57andFemale, ArthurPoet, shiobe, jfromga, schnecke21, Vita Brevis, Larsstephens, smileycreek, serendipityisabitch, SmartRat, politik, David Harris Gershon, kjoftherock, sillyalicia, biggiefries, archkcmo, cazcee, Lost and Found, rkthomas, NM Ray, Nurse Jeckell, cordgrass, I Lurked For Years, samanthab, ItsSimpleSimon, ramara, Egalitare, DiegoUK, ban48, rja, ericlewis0, cocinero, Oh Mary Oh, nosleep4u, wwjjd, fiercefilms, soaglow, slice, dot farmer, annieli, kerflooey, annominous, I love OCD, Dretutz, zooecium, StateofEuphoria, spooks51, slowbutsure, vahana, La Gitane, Bluerall, FarWestGirl, asterkitty, mikejay611, Nicci August, deeproots, Teiresias70, lupinella, mrsgoo, Haf2Read, marleycat, Wolf10, Santa Susanna Kid, dle2GA, akmk, BarackStarObama, abbotkinney, Grandma Susie, wintergreen8694, fossil fish, organicus, myrmecia gulosa, whaddaya, sound of progress, Andrew F Cockburn, Marihilda, bakeneko, SteelerGrrl, GrannyGeek, Alfreda89, nyer11Oak, Laurel in CA, Mathazar, BlueDragon, Woodrow Stool, IowaBiologist, SuWho, rosette, Only Needs a Beat, mod2lib, Liberal Granny, anodnhajo, sow hat, Voiceless, ahumbleopinion, scyellowdogdem, turn blue, nellgwen, tb92, orangecurtainlib, Lonely Texan, Joieau, winglion, Trotskyrepublican, FreeSpeaker, peachcreek, Syoho, Lilredhead, Arahahex, MartyM, Canines and Crocodiles, dfwlibrarian, lunachickie, sexgenderbody, Rixar13, Victim of Circumstance, AverageJoe42, ItsaMathJoke, George3, SwordsandPens, databob, maf1029, Robynhood too, patb3550, Hammerhand, nuclear winter solstice, Lily O Lady, Blue Bell Bookworm, koosah, TheMeansAreTheEnd, countwebb, BroadBlogs, SanFernandoValleyMom, Oly moly, goodpractice, HedwigKos, aresea, Vienna Blue, unfangus, alice kleeman, PragmaticDem, leeleedee, Auntie Anne, ORswede, optimistic pizza, Jeff Murdoch, northerntier, LaraJones, OjaiValleyCali, Smoh, Avilyn, tuesdayschilde, SmoovP, BadKitties, ET3117, Demeter Rising, ziniko, Mike Kahlow, Portia Elm, duhban, OceanDiver, PatMcDowell, skepticalcitizen, DressageDonkey, hwy70scientist, nancyjones, richardvjohnson, karma5230, eagleray, Kaylin, jbsoul, KansasLib, Penny GC, bygorry, ConnectTheDotsUSA, Tex Arcana, Will Stark, kkkkate, Ellamenta, rich1lenore, gr626, Figgie, zmonkey, stitchingasfastasIcan, SueZbell, Darth Stateworker, libera nos, hrhprissy, Prickly Pam, ridovem, fields4ever, DebFrmHell, tonyrose, AJayne, MrLuckyman, PrefersaPension, crhyne, MVH1, dblues, raspberryberet, silverfoxcruiser, bobcat41702, allie4fairness, EABY, bstancliff, csm, AKBear, RN that thinks, nicestjerk, Mick Sanders, Blackwolf53, august88, darleneh, citixen, RETropolis, Rockstarbandit

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site