Free Contreception for Women in the USA

There's an article going around stating that contraception could be free under the new health care law.  In this article, there was one particular statement that really stuck out.  Dr. Jeffrey Peipert a principal investigator on the study states, "the shift we need to see in the United States is a shift away from methods like the pill and condoms to the most effective methods, like implants and IUDs." Obviously he's not been in the kinds of situations that women face every single day.  He goes on to say that if someone is willing to pay for it only then will we be able to see that shift.

The Catholic Church doesn't see birth control as a preventive medicine, but more as a lifestyle choice.  Which only says to me that they wouldn't be willing to agree with making contreception available at reduced/no cost fee to women.  My only problem with that is why would the Church -- or any church regardless of religion -- be so inclined to make themselves a part of such a major decision involving a woman's right to choose. 

If we take a look at a woman who is more involved with career  than planning a family, I would think having birth control options available to her covered under her medical health plan would be ideal.  Even married or unmarried couples -- with available birth control options -- can see an opportunity to avoid an unplanned pregnancy especially if the timing just wasn't right.  

We can begin to foster the rights women deserve in having birth control available to them covered under their medical health plans.  The decision shouldn't be something that is argumentative, but rather given great consideration without further thinking through whether or not it is a necessity.  If you really wanted to be that choicy about it, what exactly does the new health law offer?  To be honest about it, I've seen nothing but increased premiums across the board.  My new Cigna health plan removed the hospital stay coverage going from $0 dollars to $500 per stay out of pocket, and happily compares that to a vacation stay at a hospital.  Excuse me, but there is no comparison.

Yes, I believe there can be a shift in lowing the rate of unplanned pregnancies.  And I believe that revolutionizing the birth control industry to move in that direction is vital.  If it is used consistently and correctly and the cost factor is removed, then yeah, we can begin to see a change.  How dramatic a chance we will see can only be governed by an over-time factor because the rate reduction will not be noticeable right away.

We are still stuck in the reality where these decisions have to have a Government ruling.  It's still the Government telling women what they can and cannot do, and what is and is not right for them.  These so called advocating groups have no compassion protesting against a woman's right to choose.  My whole thing is this, say a woman is raped and becomes pregnant, and was never on any kind of birth control for whatever reasons. Should be forced to keep a child conceived out of rape? Or does she have the right to abort that child?  Does she have the right to give it up for adoption? One would think the decision is all hers.  Whether we restrict the available funds to use to operate these clinical resources to be made available to women, it does not solve the problem.  Whereas you make birth control available to women regardless of their lifestyle, and we can probably see a shift in this area, too.

To me the whole process is going to be treated with a double edged sword because there really isn't going to be no right or wrong answers here as long as Government holds the floor.  I'd be interested in hearing the panel discussions and the arguments that are going to be delivered in favor of this cause.

Parents of sexually active daughters face the harsh reality of determining at what age should they put their daughter(s) on birth control methods. Let's keep in mind that long-term use can create other health issues, not limited to, fibroid tumors. And there's the whole market of deciding which birth control method is the right one to use, especially with all these birth control options that seem to keep popping up every where you look around.

If I were in the senate I would vote to go forward with offering free/no cost or reduced rates birth control pills covered under medical health plans. The Catholic Church should have absolutely no say in this matter because they are a bunch of screwed up individuals anyway who want to control women rights anyway, so to hell with them -- and I'm not speaking against the Church as a whole, but at some point Church has no functioning power of a woman's deciding right to pregnancy, whether she aborts that child or gives it up for adoption, or keeps it. A woman's right is what it is. A woman's right. Take a woman's right and what do you have? One problem after another.

Let there be a fair decision, and for once and for all, Government and Church regardless of religion should have no say in a woman's right.  But this is just my opinion.  You can read the entire article by going to Yahoo News and post your comments.

Media Exploitation of Body Image

It seems to me that the media has a lot to do with how women view themselves.  And it doesn't make things any better when some men play up the stereotype.  Sex appeal continues to heat up the advertising, promotion and marketing circuits because it's what sells particular items (i.e., perfume, jeans, fast food, etc.), and the image that portrays these elements of selling products leaves a visual impact that often has a negative affect.  When disorders become a factor to being thin is the new fat it becomes a serious health issue because girls and women regardless of age are trying to live up to the standards and the idea of "the perfect woman."  But let's stop and realize that there is no such thing as the perfect woman.  The strive to be thin can be both a positive and negative venture, and to some extent it weighs heavy on the minds of those who ultimately become obsessed.  Is it worth the ordeal overall?

Truth is some women can go their whole entire life thin and never suffer weight issues.  Celebrities who start thin, have children, gain weight, get thin again do so because they can afford trainers to help them keep their reputation and persona as being thin and beautiful.  Whereas every day folk have to really work at maintaining a certain weight and keeping their metabolism in check...like me!

To date organizations have been formed to specifically work with and help young girls fight the temptation of thinking they have to look a certain way in order to be accepted into society. Girls for a Change is one such organization.  "Girls For A Change (GFC) is a national organization that empowers thousands of teen girls to create and lead social change. GFC provides girls with professional female role models, leadership training and the inspiration to work together in teams to solve persistent societal problems in their communities. Explore our web site to learn more about how you can join our movement and how girls are transforming our world--and reinventing girl culture--through GFC!" 

Other areas where body image plays a factor is within self-esteem issues, with the clothes we wear, moving in to the food we eat, what our body type is -- just in how we look overall.  The ongoing competition to fit into a society based on what the media depicts, how stereotypes define today's woman, and what we're brainwashed into believing. 

Life is not supposed to be burdened with looks, sex appeal, and whether or not you have the "it" factor.  If women of all ages cannot love the skin we're in, it would probably be safe to say that a good majority of us are suicidal, if not homicidal.  We shouldn't be judged by how we look in our clothes, how fat or how thin we are, what we eat, how much money we spend on clothes, where we buy our shoes.  None of that should have any deciding factors in who we are.  We shouldn't try to be someone we're not, living beyond our means because we're trying to make an inflated statement that is as dismal as a repossession of your soul.

We spend too much time crying over how the media depicts image, as if to say, "it's telling me how I'm supposed to look," thus putting you in competition with yourself and others around you.  Why??? I simply say, (1) losing weight should be a choice not a requirement (unless it's health related), (2) the media should not decide who you should be, how you should look, or where you should go in life, (3) seriously, clothes really do not make the person contrary to what you may have heard or think you know, (4) trying to be someone that you're not based on media exploits only says you can't decide for yourself who you are or who you want to be, (5) money is the root of all evil.  It can destroy you and those around you.  You don't have to buy what media, advertisements and marketing promotions tell you. Use your mind, think for yourself, save, and you'll be happier in the end; (6) love yourself from within, this includes embracing who you are, and (7) only you can live your life to the fullest.  Don't live it based on materialistic factors.

Saving the Land of the Hollywood Sign

The "Hollywood" sign is a national landmark and, therefore, the land it's on and that which surrounds it should be saved. Period! To force any unnecessary building around it would take away from its true authenticity, and would eventually make it more mediocre. It should have never come under scrutiny of entertaining the idea to ever sale the land to anyone for any purpose.


Wasn't there some discussion years ago about selling it? Or even tearing down the sign completely? I can't remember exactly, but I just think people who are land developers both commercial and residential, with tons of money, seem to have way too much time on their hands to want to destroy what California is the home of today. I honestly don't believe that Californians would let evil money mongers take away what is known to be a part of our history.

Do I think temporarily changing the sign to say, "Save the Peak," was a good idea? Of course I do and I'm glad there are those advocates out there with big enough balls to take such a stand. It just continues to prove that although us Californians may be silent in some things, but when we need to stand up and fight, we have a voice louder than thunder. Believe that.

I am happy that a deal will eventually be reached to save the land.