Is Using the Term to “Coed” to Describe Women Sexist?

Let’s forget for a moment that you only really see the word “co-ed” used on, well, Playboy. It’s been forty years since most colleges integrated male and female populations, if not more. Is there any reason to continue to break women apart as a separate college population? HotAir’s contributor thinks so.

She also thinks women shouldn’t ask the state to pay for them to have consequence-free sex — by way of arguing against the contraception mandate expanded healthcare coverage for women’s health. That’s not really what it is, though — as anyone will tell you, oral contraceptives have medical value apart from the prophylactic. But let’s take Ms. Korbe at her word. Despite her inflammatory dismissal of a woman’s right to make her own sexual choices, by that rubric, expanded women’s coverage would be little more than an exercise in formal equality. Men already can enjoy consequence-free sex — and do, well into old age (who here thinks Viagra is used for reproduction??), because of insurance. Guaranteeing women the same right is another step on the long road to making women coequal participants in the workforce and society, able to enjoy the same things men do, while doing the same jobs men do. That’s a dream American women deserve, and Republicans despise.

Advertisements

7 comments

  1. she’s not dismissing a woman’s right to make her own contraceptive choices -did we read the same article? She’s saying that we women should make our choices AND PAY FOR THEM OUT OF OUR OWN POCKETS. Big difference, that. Is the concept so very outrageous? Sounds like you believe that we should be able to walk to the drugstore, pick things up off the shelves and walk out the door without stopping by the register to pay for our selections – isn’t that called theft?

    I’m 42. As an uninsured young woman, I paid out of pocket for my birth control. When I had an insurance policy that didn’t cover contraception, I paid out of pocket then too. Basic birth control is a lot cheaper now than it was then….what are you whining about?

  2. It’s not theft if someone else is paying for it.

    And the problem I have is (1) contraceptives aren’t just contraceptives, they’re medicine for hormonal ailments, and (2) if they’re just medical aids for consequence-free sex, like Viagra, then insurance should either cover or not cover such aids equally.

  3. Debora R. · ·

    If that someone else has been coerced into doing so, they have been either robbed or enslaved.

    1. The law coerces your employer into paying you a salary. It’s against the law to make you work for free. I guess that means your employer is being robbed or enslaved?

  4. Debora R. · ·

    No one is arguing the other uses of birth control – the argument is about coercion and personal responsibility.

  5. Healthcare benefits are a part of an individual’s compensation for their work. It isn’t theft, because it is something the employee is entitled to in lieu of their work. Health insurance belongs to the employee – and it is up to the employee to decide what they want to use this benefit/compensation towards.

  6. blackluke8 · ·

    Ah yes, more extremely unsound arguments from the feminist left. If birthcontrol pills are used to treat a disease process or hormonally related ailment, such as endometriosis, that’s called hormone therapy. If they are used to prevent pregnancy, that’s called birth control. The former seeks to treat a condition that is unforseeable and not the result of choices the patient makes. Therefore insurance, as a risk mitigation tool is appropriate, since not everyone will get a hormonal condition and the payouts are therefore sound from an actuarial perspective. Birth control on the other hand, is a choice, not a treatment for an ailment. And it’s a choice every woman of child bearing age could conceivably make. Therefore it is apples and oranges. Furthermore, Viagra is not prescribed to offer consequence free sex. It does not treat STDs or prevent pregnancy. It does however, treat a sexual dysfunction. While I concede that unconstrained periods or endometriosis would put a damper on sex, female birth control is not generally prescribed to treat sexual dysfunction. Quite the opposite. It seeks to limit the consequences of sex for a fully functional female. Again, apples and oranges.

    And feminists wonder why rational thinking men think they are blithering idiots with no capacity for reason and an endless dependency complex? Look no further…

%d bloggers like this: