Senate Let's Talk: Feminism

Are you wearing underpants?

 

Didn't Sapient used to make jokes about not wearing pants while posting?

 

And even if somebody didn't want them, having organs forcibly removed from your body wthout your consent (something for which it's absence can wreck havoc on the female body) can be a pretty traumatic violation in and of itself.

 

Yes, it would be. I remember when I shared that article dealing with this topic a while back. Then someone got upset over the article mentioning the founder of Planned Parenthood and so on. Oh, gosh.

Joss Wheddon handled the feminism in that movie well. A lot of people overlooked Wanda and focused on that controversy involving Black Widow, which was kinda sad. I loved that movie for many reasons. But I do think there was some justifiable concern over Tony Stark's joke about what he would do if ruled Asgard. He said, "I will be reinstitution prima nocta." I was like, "What the heck is that?" I found out it had something to do with kings and noblemen having the right to have sex with peasant women before their weddings. As you can imagine, people interpreted it as a rape joke. I think that's legitimate criticism, but it goes to show that Tony can be...an ***hole. They've been prepping us for a while to side with Steve Rogers against Stark in Civil War. That's the whole reason for it, I imagine.

Well, back to the Black Widow thing. The film had that in there for many reasons, including the notion of Ultron being Tony Stark's child. Well, it's kinda sad that he's also Banner's child, too, in a sense. Gosh, that sounds wrong (Stark and Banner). Lmao. Anyhow, Wanda and Pietro were children who lost their parents because of Stark's weapons, and the Vision is the child of... Well, you know what I mean.

It is an important discussion for anyone to have control over her body and whether or not she will beget a child. And so like Anakinfan and that article said, far too many women in this country do not have control over their bodies because of these ridiculous laws. Some men just cannot stand the notion of women having the liberty to make choices. And here's how I deal with it: I don't give two fornications what they think. Women everywhere should have the legal rights they deserve in healthcare.

 

I like the idea but in today's litigious society a pharmacist giving out prescription to birth control assumes the responsibility of a bad reaction correct? Let's face it you could have one woman sue the pharmacist cause she didn't give all her info and still blames the pharmacist.

 

No, Beezel - well technically anyone can (try) to sue anyone else for anything ... the "guilty" party would be the prescription writer, i.e. the doctor.

Now (caution: not a lawyer), since pharmacist are supposedly very knowledgeable on drug interactions, it's possible that a pharmacist who ignored a potential interaction (kept silent) might be successfully sued.

 

Ok, so a pharmacist has to ask all the right questions but isn't going to be kinda weird and invasive for a pharmacist to ask all the pertinent information in such a public setting? I mean if a woman wants a prescription at least in a doctor's office she gets a measure of privacy. At the pharmacy she will get nothing. I understand the tradeoffs but are woman really gonna want to have to expose themselves to such lack of privacy issues? The only reason I can see woman going to a pharmacist is to go to the same place they have already been using. I don't expect women to go out on a limb and just randomly go to the nearest pharmacy first.

I guess I see only pharmacists writing scipts for the meds the women have already been taking. If you are a new patient with no proof of taking birth control, they won't take the risk. They may just refer you to the doctor until you find the meds that work for you.

Its like an Asthma patient getting a prescription for their condition from the doctor and after getting stabilized on the right meds they just switch over to the pharmacy to write and fill the prescriptions.

 

Um, pharmacists don't write prescriptions, they fill them. And unless that pharmacist handles the person's other prescriptions, the pharmacist wouldn't be aware of any interactions.

As for your asthma example: umm, yeah. The doctor, as said above, writes it, the pharmacist fills it. IF, however, the pharmacist fills other prescriptions for the person AND knows of drug interactions...they (he/she) would be negligent for not speaking up (morally if not legally anyway).

No, I wouldn't go to a Rite-Aid, Bartell's, etc. and ask the pharmacist if they would "give me" X, Y, or Z because I have "such and such condition" and I hear such a drug would be good...they'd politely tell me to go get a doctor's prescription.

 

Read the law, the pharmacists actually prescribe the medication. Its not over the counter. So a pharmacist would have to do the same thing as a doctor if he wants to protect his ass.

Like I said I don't see any pharmacists giving out birth control willy nilly without at least one prescription from a doctor. They will continue to fill them as long as they have proof of a form that works.

 

Well, you're wrong in this country.

Anyway, I've heard that birth control is (proposed to be?) OTC. So I guess that means you can just pick one brand off the shelf and pay the cashier, no pharmacist needed.

 

Like my former sociology professor said, oftentimes law is a commodity to be bought and sold by the highest bidder. Some laws, vague or not, are used to support sexism, racism, and other prejudices. I hate that the world works like that, and we will have to work to change that.

I agree with everything Valairy said. Her rhetorical Soresu blocks any Juyo that comes her way. Why? It's the truth.

 

Actually, that's a Republican proposal to, metaphorically, screw you over. It's counter-intuitive, but it's true.

 

Hear hear. The sooner state legislatures realize that abstinence-only education is an abject failure, the better off we'll be as a nation.

 

Or is it over-the-counter-intuitive? Eh? Eh?

 

Of course, what then happens when the cashier refuses to sell the product because that makes him/her participate in something against his/her principles?

 

Yes, indeed.

 

This is actually something I've been thinking about a lot lately. I think you make a good point, it's nice to be told you look nice, but to only stick with that is certainly doing young girls a disservice.

But the reason I've been thinking about it a lot is I work with kids who have been burned, and I currently have a few young girls with significant burns all over their bodies including their faces. These are kids who are most likely going to have big self-esteem issues and right now they are in a safe place with people who are used to burns, so I try and make a point to tell them how beautiful they are, but then also complement them on something else because I don't want to be that person who only talks about their looks. I just think it's important that they know they are beautiful too.
I realize this is a unusual situation and not really the target audience for the article, but in a way it's made me pay more attention to what I say to all children, but most especially to girls.

[/random story]

 

Some of those were really great.

 

Is it wrong I read your link, saw P90 and wondered what on earth machine guns have to do with this?