Feminism isfor everyone.

a celebration of feminism at UVA.
become a fan on facebook!
Feb 3, 2009,11:08 AM
money for birth control does not stimulate the economy

according to ruben navarette jr, the $200 M originally listed in the stimulus package to defray the rising costs of birth control is a ludicrous sham of how to best stimulate the economy, which channels the eugenics movement.

of course, after evoking images of Margaret Sanger and her well-documented racism as certain by-products of birth control pills, the money going towards the birth control issue was taken out of the stimulus package.

while margaret sanger was unequivocally wrong in her supremacist, eugenicist agenda, this does not mean that birth control is terrible - nor does it mean that the idea of making birth control more available is ridiculous.

during the Nicolae Ceausescu dictatorship in Romania, access to contraceptives was widely banned and women were sometimes using abortions as their primary source of birth control.

in bringing up the example of Romania, I am of course constructing a reductionist, extremist argument. limiting government spending on birth control is not equivocal to constructing a communist regime with widespread abortions to prevent the birth of starving children.

but this ridiculous, offensive tactic is exactly used by mr. navarette, jr. spending government money on birth control does not equate to constructing a widespread eugenics movement.

what is necessary is a dialogue, since it is inescapably true that governmental policy on family planning does have an effect on the nation - socially, politically, and yes, economically.

writes author Gail Kligman,
"Analysis of reproductive policies thereby illuminates the strategies employed by the state and by individuals to achieve their respective goals and exposes how intrusions of the former led to conformity, or to evasion or distortion by the latter" (The Politics of Duplicity, link to e-book here, if you are a UVA student).

does this mean that we should include bc money in an economic stimulus package? maybe not. but it is an over-simplified and useless argument to say that spending USD on bc will, by definition, create a new-age eugenics movement.
10 previous posts
spoken word poetry ★ eight babies at once. ★ Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Bill Becomes Law! ★ Lily Ledbetter Bill is through the House! ★ thank you, president obama! ★ Virginia Feminists in Action ★ Obama v. Bush on Abortion ★ Mexico City Policy Update! ★ uncomfortable... ★ Take Back the Night 2009 ★
Past posts by month
August 2006 ★ September 2006 ★ October 2006 ★ November 2006 ★ December 2006 ★ January 2007 ★ February 2007 ★ April 2007 ★ August 2007 ★ September 2007 ★ October 2007 ★ January 2008 ★ February 2008 ★ March 2008 ★ April 2008 ★ May 2008 ★ June 2008 ★ July 2008 ★ August 2008 ★ September 2008 ★ October 2008 ★ November 2008 ★ December 2008 ★ January 2009 ★ February 2009 ★ March 2009 ★ April 2009 ★ May 2009 ★ June 2009 ★ July 2009 ★ September 2009 ★ October 2009 ★ November 2009 ★ December 2009 ★ January 2010 ★ February 2010 ★ March 2010 ★ April 2010 ★ June 2010 ★ August 2010 ★ September 2010 ★ October 2010 ★ November 2010 ★ December 2010 ★ January 2011 ★
Credits
Coded by wickedicy banner from Reviviscent.