Guess What I Did Last Night!

Hey, get your minds out of the gutter people.

Ok, fine…(sigh) Guess what I did before that.

I officially registered for my fall classes at California State University Northridge. I have two honest to goddess, real journalism classes, an anthropology class on women’s roles in ancient to modern societies and a class on comparative art studies. Can you tell I’m putting off the science and math requirements again? (ah-hem) Next semester. I promise.

While it was exciting to finally register for classes at the big kid’s school, the thrill was tempered by the constantly running calculator in my head. How much of this will my student loans cover? How much are the books going to cost? How much is the parking pass going to be for the semester? College is an expensive endeavor at any age, and I would say, a bit more precarious when it’s just little ole’ you paying the bills. I’ve long since passed the time where my parents will be helping out with this sort of thing.

One of the things I have been looking forward to as a student on a state campus, is access to the student health facilities. As a registered college kid, I can get lower cost health care on campus. As far as I can tell, this includes nifty things like eye exams, prescriptions, minor doctor’s visits and the like. I even heard something about massage appointments. I will definitely be looking into that! I was also under the impression that young women could get low cost, discreetly handled birth control pills through the health center should they want to keep the information that they're sexually active to themselves…or at least, not broadcast it to their parents. Apparently, I was mistaken.

Back in 2005, President Bush pushed through Congress and signed a complex budget bill called the Deficit Reduction Act into law. The goal of this nifty bit o’ legislation was to reduce spending on federal programs by $39 billion. Most of this money , of course, is coming from subsidized student loans and Medicaid. One of the effects of this bit of accounting acrobatics was to create a disincentive for drug companies to offer school discounts. The result is that birth control pills, which were once available to young women on campus for about $15 per month, have sky-rocketed to upwards of $50 per month. When you’re trying to pay for $150 text books and eat a decent meal every now and again that adds up.

The Wall Street Journal Online ran an article about this on July 25th. They reported that many students are having to switch to a generic pill (where available) or tell their parents and try to get it covered in their family health plan. Neither of these are terrific options. Once your body is used to a certain dose of hormones, it’s not a great idea to start fiddling around with it by taking a different pill that may have higher levers of hormones. There is also the issue of remembering to take the thing. Young women who were on the Nuva Ring or patch may forget to take their pill if they have had to switch. You have to get into the habit of taking them. Forget once or twice and it’s enough to cause an unwanted pregnancy.

I won’t even go into the issues with having to tell your father you need your birth control pills to be covered on his insurance. Not a conversation I would have wanted to have at the age of 18 with my dad. Ugh.

“Susan Maly, a 22-year-old student at the University of Iowa, says she struggled
with switching pills recently. When she went to her college health center to get
a refill on her Ortho Tri-Cyclen Lo prescription a few months ago, she was
distressed to find out that it had gone up to $54 from about $18. Starting this
month, she has switched to a cheaper generic pill that has higher levels of
estrogen than the Lo brand.
"That was an issue for me," says Ms. Maly, but she says she will see how things work out for a couple of months. Initially, she says she felt some heartburn side effects from the new pill, but that has since gone away. She finds the dramatic price increase "unfair" to women who have come to rely on birth control, and feel comfortable with the brand they are on.
"This is the one thing that many females on campus are getting from student health," says Ms. Maly. "It felt like we were a target."

I think I would feel the same way – targeted. Let’s face it; I don’t think my college boyfriend would have offered to go halvsies with me on my birth control pill. The guys can pick up their free condoms, and they’re all set. What do they need to worry about higher pill prices for anyway?

Then there is this little monetary issue for the schools:

“College health centers also say the change threatens to lessen the quality of
service they can provide, since the price increases have eaten into the profits
that they make. Pamela Houle, administrative director for the health
center at Skidmore College in Saratoga Springs, N.Y., says the health center
now subsidizes each NuvaRing by about $4. "Previously, we were making $17 a
ring." That may mean fewer educational resources and materials down
the line, she says.”

Oh well, I’m sure they could save a lot of money if they just stopped offering all STD testing, counseling, birth control and condom programs and just taught “abstinence only” on campus. After all, that’s what the Bush administration advocates for high school students, people up to age 29 and government subsidized programs to fight AIDS in Africa, so it must be what works the best.

This just in, "Former Bush Surgeon General Says He Was Muzzled"

Sadly, this article that popped up today at ABC News is not at all surprising. Former Surgeon General Dr. Richard Carmona (2002 - 06), who was appointed by the Bush administration, spoke today about the administration's policies about important health issues being ignored or blocked for political reasons. (What a shock, ah-hem.) He's talking about little things like stem cell research, abstinence only education and reproductive health.Dr. Carmona is quoted in article:

"Anything that doesn't fit into the political appointees' ideological,theological or political agenda is ignored, marginalized or simply buried. The problem with this approach is that in public health, as in a democracy, there is nothing worse than ignoring science, or marginalizing the voice of science for reasons driven by changing political winds. The job of surgeon general is to be the doctor of the nation, not the doctor of a political party," Carmona added.

Referring to stem cell research:

“Carmona said he was prevented from talking publicly even about the science
underpinning the research to enable the U.S. public to have a better understanding of a complicated issue. He said most of the public debate over the matter has been driven by political, ideological or theological motivations."I was blocked at every turn. I was told the decision had already been made -- stand down, don't talk about it," he said.

My favorite part of the article was at the very end. Referring to some of Carmona's predecessors including Dr. C. Everett Koop who served under President Reagan,

"Carmona said some of his predecessors told him, "We have never seen it
as partisan, as malicious, as vindictive, as mean-spirited as it is today, and
you clearly have worse than anyone's had."

I really wonder what these people in the Bush administration are thinking sometimes. Hasn't history shown, that you may be able to keep people in the dark for a while, but eventually the truth leaks out? No matter how hard these conservatives try to stifle common sense and proven scientific facts and statistics, eventually the people are going to figure it out. Take abstinence only education for example. No matter how hard they try to convince a high school full of teenagers that sex is an evil, dirty thing, most of these kids are going to come to the conclusion that their abstinence only sex ed class is full of you-know-what. Scaring people with religion is no way to prepare them for real life. Education and awareness is good. Fear and misinformation is disastrous.

This all comes as Congress is preparing to review Bush's new appointee for Surgeon General, Dr. James Holsinger. Sounds like George has gotten tired of censoring the rational voice of science and is looking for someone who will toe the line a little better. This guy is a real gem.

According to the article at Think Progress, he was a member of the United Methodist Judicial Council and tried to block the appointment of a female pastor who was also a "practicing lesbian." What the heck is a practicing lesbian, anyway? Does she only practice lesbianism on alternate Thursdays and Sunday afternoons? More importantly, why is her sexual orientation any business of the church? He has also been quoted as saying that he sees homosexuality as “an issue not of orientation but of lifestyle.” Which is probably why he founded the Hope Springs Community Church with a commitment to curing people of their homosexuality. Nice.

This sounds like a rational, scientific guy that I feel comfortable putting in charge of informing the nation about important health issues.I can't wait to hear what he has to say about Plan B contraceptives, stem cell research and abortion. Let's just hope Congress asks the tough questions in the upcoming confirmation hearings.

Update:

Here's this morning's article at The New York Times.

Here's a thought...

I know there are a lot of awards shows out there and more "Top 100" lists than we could ever hope to ingest. We've got the Oscars, the Grammys, the Pulitzer Prize, the MTV Movie Awards and a few hundred others. I really think we need a new one, though. Just hear me out, people.

I propose that one of the toy companies, say Mattel or someone, gets together with us feminists and nominate someone every year for their own action figure. There could be a whole on-line campaign, we could all vote and at the end the person with the most votes gets a collectible action figure of their likeness manufactured for retail sale. The nominees would have to be people who have taken significant action and worked towards making the world a little bit better for women (and therefore society as a whole). By making a cool toy out of the winning person's likeness, little kids would see that you don't necessarily have to be an X-Man or a Marvel character to be a hero. Also, all the proceeds from the sale of the toy would have to go to a charitable organization that helps women and kids.


If such a campaign existed, and if I could nominate someone this week, it would be Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. She rocks and here's why:

She has delivered TWO oral dissents this session regarding the ban on partial birth abortion and the recent shenanigans concerning the 180 day limit for women to sue for workplace discrimination. This is highly unusual for Justice Ginsberg who has usually opted for a more congenial approach to dealing with decisions she disagrees with and has never delivered two oral dissents in one session. Clearly, she's concerned about where this new court is headed. I have to say I agree.


She became the first woman to be on both the Harvard and Columbia law reviews. She earned her L.L.B. degree at Columbia and tied for first in her class. So, the lady studied and worked hard!

She was a Professor of Law at Rutgers University School of Law from 1963 to 1972, and at Columbia Law School from 1972 to 1980, where she became the first tenured woman and co-authored the first law school case book on sex discrimination.

In 1977 she became a fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University.


In 1972, as the chief litigator of the ACLU's women's rights project, she argued several cases in front of the Supreme Court and attained a reputation as a skilled oral advocate. Over the next eight years, she sought to persuade a majority of the Supreme Court that sex-based legal distinctions should trigger some form of heightened judicial scrutiny.

Her distinguished teaching career and ACLU achievements won her a national reputation and prompted President Jimmy Carter to appoint her to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 1980.

In 1993 President Bill Clinton had the opportunity to become the first Democratic president in twenty-six years to make a Supreme Court appointment. Clinton announced that he was looking for a nominee with "a fine mind, good judgment, wide experience in the law and in the problems of real people, and somebody with a big heart." Calling Ginsburg "the Thurgood Marshall of gender equality law," he concluded that she possessed the requisite intellectual and emotional stature for the job.

She's listed in the Encyclopedia Britannica and there is a very interesting piece about her at http://www.supremecourthistory.org/.

"Between 1972 and 1978, Ginsburg argued six cases before the Court involving sex-role stereotyping and won five. In Craig v. Boren (1976), the Court finally accepted Ginsburg’s view (expressed in a "friend-of-the-court" brief) that gender-based legal distinctions deserved heightened scrutiny.
A later generation of feminist legal scholars has criticized Ginsburg's equal protection theories. They argue that her approach failed to take account of the real differences between the sexes that may sometimes warrant laws giving women preferential treatment. Critics and admirers agree, however, that Ginsburg's work in the 1970s fundamentally altered the legal and social landscape, creating unprecedented personal and professional opportunities for women."

So - to recap- she's been fighting the good fight in regards to gender equality for most of her professional life. She's smart, tough and she knows how to work within the system to effect change. This might not be as visually stimulating as actually leaping over a tall building, but I think it's much more impressive.

I would totally buy a Ruth Bader Ginsberg action figure.

Who would you nominate?

Would You Take It?

The FDA just approved a new birth control pill, called Lybrel. It's designed to allow women to suppress their periods indefinitely by providing a continuous low dose of hormones all month. It's being manufactured by Wyeth Pharmaceuticals and is poised to hit the market in July.

From ABC News -

"Lybrel, a name meant to evoke "liberty," would be the fourth new oral contraceptive that doesn't follow the standard schedule of 21 daily active pills, followed by seven sugar pills -- a design meant to mimic a woman's monthly cycle. Among the others, Yaz and Loestrin 24 shorten monthly periods to three days or less and Seasonique, an updated version of Seasonale, reduces them to four times a year."

Something about this just makes me sad. I know it sounds silly, but I really miss having my period. Yeah, yeah, I know. I remember the cramps and the water retention and the bloating...and the zits.(ugh) It was a drag some of the time. But it was also a very powerful thing. It meant that I was a woman and it was a natural part of life.

Our society looks on this amazing thing us women can do as a "curse" and that's just not cool. It is not a curse. It is not shameful. It is not something to discuss via embarrassed whispers in the ladies room, damn-it! If men could could bleed continuously for five days and live to tell the tale every month do you really think it would be a shameful thing? Hell no, there would be parades and national holidays devoted to the phenomenon. C'mon people have you seen the Washington monument? Uh-huh.

So, now we have a pill that will eradicate this icky, shameful, awful thing us gals have to put up with every month. That's just great.

I particularly enjoyed this passage from the ABC article.

She [Dr. Mindy Wiser-Estin] has seen a big increase in the last year in patients asking about it, but has one concern that leads her to encourage younger women to take a break every 12 weeks. About 1 percent of oral contraceptive users become pregnant each year, and young women taking continuous pills who have never been pregnant may not recognize the symptoms, she said. "They may not know it in time to do something about it," Wiser-Estin said.

Wyeth obviously thinks otherwise. (I'll bet they do. ah-hem)

"It allows women to put their menstrual cycle on hold" and reduces 17 related symptoms, from irritability to bloating, said Dr. Amy Marren, director of clinical affairs for Wyeth Pharmaceuticals.

Call me cynical, but I don't think Wyeth has our best interests at heart here. That quote sounds like she read it off of the pamphlet for one thing. For another, they are set to make a considerable amount of money off of convincing us that our periods are unneccesary, obsolete functions that we would all be better off without. I find it disturbing that this pill creates a situation where a woman is so out of touch with her body that she may not notice that she's pregnant. This does not sound like a great idea to me.

Slate.com had this intersting little tid-bit back on Oct. 18, 2006

"In two different surveys of college women, Ingrid Johnston-Robledo, associate professor of psychology and women's studies at the State University of New York, College at Fredonia, found that women who were asked to name positive aspects of menstruation reported that it was a sign of health and fertility and that it helped connect them to other women and the rhythms of nature. This may sound like an ode to the inner moon goddess, but it has relevance. Johnston-Robledo found that women who didn't like their periods were also more ashamed of their bodies."

I know there are women who have terrible cramps and pain every month who may be looking forward to this new pill. I understand why they would want to take this. I just hope that they do it it responsibly and with great care.

I personally wouldn't take one of these things if you paid me to.

Would you?

I'm ba-ack

Hi everyone,

I kind of disappeared there for a month or so. Uhmm..sorry about that. It's not that I haven't had anything to say, 'cause I always have something to carry on about. Recently, though, my mind has been a little occupied with personal matters. Nothing bad. Quite the opposite, really. (Grinning from ear to ear) You see, I met someone a little while ago and I've been so damn happy I can barely concentrate. It's all I can do lately to get my school work done. Stringing together whole sentences is a trial because I keep finding myself doodling little hearts in the margins of my notes.

Makes studying for finals difficult, let me tell you. Sure feels good, though.

This is just a post to say "Hey, I'm still here!" and to promise that I'll come up with something interesting to write about this week. Honest.

There's got to be something going on that I can make a post out of that doesn't involve my twitterpated ramblings and carrying-ons about my new love. (happy sigh) I mean, surely Hillary has been busy or the preview for the new Bratz movie has come out or maybe Good Morning America has pissed me off again. Something.

In the mean time, I hope everyone has a great week and that you're all making plans for the holiday weekend coming up. I know I am.

More to come...

-Michelle

What To Do?

Last week I mentioned the appalling decision our oh-so-wise-and-virtuous Supreme Court just passed down regarding the recent federal ban on certain abortion rights. I've been doing a lot of reading this past week, trying to make heads or tails of the facts. As you can imagine, there has been quite a lot written in just a matter of days (more like hours, really) about this case. Pro-choice organizations have lost no time organizing protests and actions against it.

Pro-life organization have mostly been gloating.

To them I say this: Enjoy your brief moment of what you think is a victory. All this has done is mobilize a once complacent majority who foolishly believed they had a right to their own bodies. Those of us who have grown up in a post Roe vs. Wade era had no idea what government invasion into our most basic rights truly entails. Let me assure you, we won't stand for it. We're calling 'bullshit' on this one, kids. Oh yes.

In case you are unfamiliar with the decision, here are the basics:

* The Supreme Court has ignored past precedent and has outlawed a vaguely determined kind of second-trimester abortion.
* They have made no exception in cases when a woman's health is in danger.
* They have ignored findings by the most respected aspects of the medical community regarding the safety and necessity of such procedures in certain cases.
* The decision was passed with a narrow 5 to 4 margin with the most recent Bush appointees voting in favor of the ban.

Lynn Harris over at Salon.com has written an amazing and easily understood piece about this. I highly recommend you check it out.

Another fun fact - over 85% of abortions are performed before the so-called "partial birth abortions" would come into play. Also, there is no medical term for what the Supreme Court has just outlawed. The term "partial birth abortion" is a phrase cooked up by pro-life legislators to sound more like someone is killing a baby. Ah, fun with semantics.

I didn't want to write about this little news story until I had something to offer in the way of action. Luckily, there seems to be a lot mobilizing going on in response to this attack on our freedoms. Senator Barbara Boxer of California and Rep. Jerry Nadler of New York are sponsoring the Freedom of Choice Act. This act, if passed, would restore our reproductive rights as outlined in Roe vs Wade. It's crucial that our representatives hear from us on this issue. A "national call in day" has been organized for TODAY (4/25) to show congress how much support there is for this bill. You can bet the pro-life folks are going to be very vocal in their opposition, so we have to call in too. Go to the link below for information on who to call and don't forget to tell your friends who may be interested.

http://prochoiceaction.org/campaign/congress_foca_0407

Here's some additional information from the National Organization for Women (NOW):

You can help jump-start the legislative reversal of last week's Supreme Court
decision, by making a phone call or sending an email. Join NOW and our allies
for a National Call-in Day on Wednesday, April 25, the anniversary of our 2004
March for Women's Lives, to ask your members of Congress to co-sponsor the
Freedom of Choice Act.

As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg put it in her stinging dissent, "the Act, and the Court's defense of it, cannot be understood as anything other than an effort to chip away at a right declared again and again by this Court." That effort to chip away at reproductive rights is well underway in state legislatures around the country and we have every reason to expect that this decision will galvanize those efforts. What can we do?

In addition to vigilantly opposing abortion restrictions that are proposed in our state houses, we need a federal law that will protect this right and place it beyond the reach of individual state legislatures. The Freedom of Choice Act would do just that. The Act would guarantee that women can exercise the reproductive freedom that was promised in Roe v. Wade and additionally would preserve that freedom should Roe be overturned by the new 5-4 anti-abortion majority on the Supreme Court

Call Your Members of Congress - 202-224-3121

Join women's rights supporters across the country for this national call-in day on
Wednesday -- and keep calling until you get through. Use the switchboard number above, and ask for your members of Congress -- or get their receptionist's direct phone number from our directory. Ask for the staff person who handles this issue, and request politely that the member co-sponsor the Freedom of Choice Act. If your senator or representative is already a co-sponsor (see a list of Senate and House co-sponsors), say thank you (trust us, they're hearing from the other side!) While you're at it, drop them an e-mail for added impact. Send a message to both of your senators and to your representative today using our easy alert system.

UPDATE

I just called all my representatives. Here's the breakdown.

Congressman Berman - has already signed on as a co-sponsor of the bill. I expressed my thanks.

Senator Diane Fienstein - The staff member I spoke to wasn't sure if she is a co-sponsor, but did assure me that she is pro-choice and would be supporting the bill. I said "thank you" again!

Senator Barbara Boxer - She is already a sponsor on the bill so I just called to say "thank you" again and voice my support.

It was really easy to make the calls. Just ask the operator who answers to send you to the appropriate person's office and their staff will answer any questions you have and take note of your opinion.

Grab Bag

I've been thinking that I want to post something this week, but I'm having a terrible time focusing on one thing. There's so much going on in the world and in my life right now, it's impossible to pluck one item out of the air and write about it. I have therefore decided, to choose a few things and jot down some impressions. I hope you don't mind...

First, the news from Virginia Tech this week is heartbreaking. There aren't powerful enough words to express what's going on for those students, their families, the staff and community there. The healing process is going to be long and painful for those left behind.

I have a little experience with this, having managed to survive the events of September 11th, 2001 when I was working near the World Trade Center. I have one little bit of advice for anyone connected with this terrible incident: Turn off your television. Seriously, get out of the house, avoid newspapers, TVs, radios - just get away from it. The media is going to be feeding on this story for weeks. You don't need to see it. It's not healthy.

After 9/11, it was impossible for anyone to avoid all the news reports and disturbing images. They will take a toll on you and your delicate state of mental health at times like these. Get outside, go for a walk, go to a silly movie...anything. You'll drive yourself crazy if you immerse yourself in the evening news. Take care of yourselves and your friends/family. Don't worry about what's going on with the reporters.

And please know that people are praying for you and sending out all the good healing energy we can.

(((Whew)))

On to other shitty news. What the hell is going on with the Supreme Court? Wait, don't answer that. I know exactly what's going on. Our lovely president has appointed just enough scary, Christian conservative, S.O.B.s to the court to start chipping away at Roe vs. Wade until every woman in this country is legally no more than a barefoot-baby-producing-machine beholden to the old white men in power for any decisions that concern her own health. Y'know, I think the less I write about this today the better. I'll probably just get myself into trouble. Besides, I'm thinking the recent 5 to 4 decision to ban partial birth abortions is worthy of it's own, detailed and well thought out post. Yeah...more on that later.

In other thoughts:

I got my admission letter from California State University Northridge this week! I'm going to be a junior in college. I've never been that before. Very, very cool! I am really looking forward to finding out what classes I can take (women's studies?) and actually getting to take a journalism class or two. Hooray!

Also, a thought about spring cleaning.

I finally sold my old car this week! I'm also getting rid of an old computer desk. All of this purging of stuff is requiring me to go through closets, reorganize, prioritize and generally throw away lots of miscellaneous stuff. Some of these things are connected with an old relationship that I've been sloughing off for a little while now. I would have expected it to make me sad, but actually... it's incredibly freeing.

Who new spring cleaning could be so liberating?

Hmmmm, there's a few other things I could carry on with but I'm going to wrap this up now. I hope everyone is having a great week and is looking forward to an even better weekend. I'll catch up with y'all in a day or two!