Zatera Ul

Laughing at NOW

Filed under: Feminism, General, Politics — July 22, 2005 @ 4:15 pm

Here are the Resolutions from the latest NOW National Conference, and I am succumbing to the temptation to ridicule them.

WHEREAS, throughout its history, the National Organization for Women (NOW) has used both traditional and nontraditional means to achieve full equality for women, including women’s access to safe, legal abortion and birth control….

Access to abortion doesn’t really promote equality. It does make it easier for jerks to get sex, and easier for women to act like that kind of jerk, but achieving equality of that sort is not progress.

Abortion may be legal, but it is not safe.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that NOW call upon all members of the U.S. Senate to give meaning to democracy by insisting that each new appointment to the highest court reflect our country’s women until parity is reached on the Court….

The job of the Supreme Court is to interpret the Constitution, not to represent each one of us personally. I would rather have a (conservative) man as “my” Supreme Court justice anyway. The women have been too flaky.

WHEREAS, women’s freedom to choose when and if we have children is a basic right that is fundamental to controlling our lives and directing our futures….

This is in the context of making the morning-after pill available over the counter. Actually, we already have that freedom, in the freedom to choose when and if to have sex. (Feminists always seemed to me to be a little fuzzy on the concept that babies are caused by sex.)

WHEREAS, an age restriction, currently under consideration by the FDA, would create serious obstacles to all women’s access by requiring that MAP be sold behind-the-counter (BTC), allowing women’s reproductive choices to be unnecessarily dictated by pharmacists, and because a woman old enough to get pregnant is old enough to decide that she doesn’t want to get pregnant, and because women are insulted at the prospect of being carded for contraception….

You could just as well say that a woman that is old enough to decide to have sex is old enough to deal with the resulting baby without killing it.

WHEREAS, school paddling violates Title IX insofar as girls and boys are impacted differently, because, unlike boys, girls would have to reveal intimate personal information in order to avoid the chance of this punishment being unfairly compounded by menstrual discomfort….

I didn’t know that corporal punishment in schools was still an issue. Probably there are some schools that would benefit from having it brought back. This statement, anyway, made me snort. You could just as well argue that girls (note that now they are referred to as girls, rather than underage women as above) have an unfair advantage in being able to pad their bottoms with bulky absorbent material. A woman old enough to get her period…..

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that NOW educate the public on this issue, build coalitions with feminist activist groups that advocate for mothers’ and caregivers’ economic rights and lobby for appropriate federal and state legislation to create programs such as quality universal childcare, Social Security and tax credits for caregivers, and paid family medical leave insurance….

This section is on “Mothers’ and Caregivers’ Economic Rights.” Basically, their concern is that women who care for children and/or old people are not out earning money, and will therefore end up poor. Ew. Caring for children and the elderly are inherently time-consuming and difficult, and therefore expensive when you pay someone else to do it. In recent years, a lot of women have done the math and realized that after child care and other costs of employment, they were actually making very few or even negative dollars, and could vastly improve their quality of life by staying home and being homemakers. (This, of course, assumes the existence of stable, wage-earning husbands, those conservative men so despised by feminists.) Feminists also discount the satisfactions of working for yourself and your family at home; at times I get the feeling that feminists just don’t think of home as a safe, happy place. Anyway, since the costs of sending a woman with kids and elders to care for out to work will probably be greater than what she can make working, we must need some kind of government subsidy. Shift the costs onto the taxpayers! Ick.

No Comments

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.