Oh for heaven's sake! The FDA thinks Plan B would spawn teen orgies? Really?
Via numerous sources
In the memo released by the FDA, Dr. Curtis Rosebraugh, an agency medical officer, wrote: “As an example, she [Woodcock] stated that we could not anticipate, or prevent extreme promiscuous behaviors such as the medication taking on an ‘urban legend’ status that would lead adolescents to form sex-based cults centered around the use of Plan B.�
Hmm. Interesting theory, Doc! And hey, as long as we're totally making up implausibly rediculous scenarios we "could not anticipate, or prevent" how about banning Plan B because we could not anticipate, or prevent extreme promiscuous behaviors such as conservative wingnuts molesting (and potentially impregnating) underage children in their custodial care? Oh wait! Too late!
So what I want to know, then, is why Dr. Rosebraugh sees fit to stuff up when there are other, well documented scenarios that would be *at least* as chilling as hypothetical teen orgies. I'd think something like "some of my psychopatically allies in the anti-sex community might obtain Plan B to cover up for the fact that he molests his dependent children, step-children, or foster children without using protection."
Which is a shame because if I thought approving the sale of Plan B would prevent molestation of custodial children by adults who not only know better but base their reputations on their arch-conservative credentials on preventing sexual depravity in others I'd rally behind a ban myself.
It's worth noting, however, that unlike hypothetical bands of youths (attempting to -- what? -- smoke Plan B to get high?) the fact that currently there is no Plan B there is certainly abuse of the innocent by supporters of Dr. Rosebraugh. Therefore his concerns are misplaced and his agency should stop stonewalling and approve it.
[It's worth noting that I am *not* saying that all Red-staters are child molesters, nor would I claim that all Blue-staters were bastions of virtue. I just think it odd that Red-staters just assume that we Blue-staters are less able to control ourselves when by virtually every conceivable measure the reverse tends to be true. --fl]
oh my god there's so many antisex lunatics about i don't know which way to look! its so scary because the more they repress people, the more dangerous the few really sick people become..
well written and good point! thank you.
i ranted about the south carolina trying to make sex toys illegal the other day...
http://mamahog.blogspot.com/2006/04/mum-darling-i-suggest-you-skip-this.html#links
as a survivor of a stepfather like that, this stuff really scares me.
[It's the "as a survivor" part that gets me right through the middle, Keda. There was no Plan B back then and he was undissuaded, right? And, for that matter, if there really *were* teenage sex-cults as Dr. Rosebraugh fears, it's unlikely their behavior would be affected by the absence or presence of Plan B either. In other words, they're down to George Carlin-type "but then you crossed the International Dateline at the same instant your warrantee expired..." sort of excuses. Thanks. --fl]
Fig,
This is the same FDA that approved Vioxx, yet can't find any medical use for marijuana.
Bonnie
[Yup. Don't even get me started. I haven't really used marijuana since maybe 1976, nor do I believe all the benefits hemp people claim for it, but I think it's incredibly silly that alcohol is legal and smoking rope isn't. Either make 'em both legal, or illegal would be fine with me, but the current split is silly. (Actually I do use alcohol for cooking but almost never drink more than a sip of the stuff uncooked.) Thanks, Bonnie. --fl]
i meant to link this too last time but forgot sorry. its depressing reading but valid.
http://www.armchairsubversive.com/
it lists republican politicians, ministers and public officials who have been found guilty of pedophilia its a long list sadly.
i found it when writing about the abortion ban and anti contraception lobbying in south dakota.http://mamahog.blogspot.com/2006/03/in-loving-memory-and-in-hopeful-future.html i wrote a follow up 2 days later too if you are interested.
and btw he wasn't dissuaded by anything but a knife to his throat when i reached 14 and had had enough. the lessons i learnt were all bad!
takes years to calm down and to find the real difference between sex and fear/violence. but openess and freedom to play are the only way forward, i truley believe*
[Yikes, Keda! And thank you for the link to ArmchairSubversive. I realize I've linked to individual bits and pieces of the site but didn't realize how extensive it was. And finally, while ArmchairSubversive appears to focus exclusively on members of a single political party, what matters to me -- more than anything! -- is that a) children should be allowed to develop their sexuality naturally without adults, and especially custodial adults, prematurely forcing it on them and b) my intuition tells me that past a certain point I think people become anti-sex extremists in proportion to their sense of guilt or shame a their own inclinations. Thanks! --fl]
Woodcock?
::snicker::
[Heh. Thanks, Ellie. --fl]
Not being Americian, I had to go and figure out what Plan B was before I understood your post. When I read the descriptions I really didn't see what the fuss is about. We have different brands of morning-after pills here in the UK, all avalibale without perscription. It's saved my ass a couple of times after condom troubles. I believe if you are under the age of 16 you're highly advised by the pharmacist to talk to your GP, but at the end of the day they sell it to you anyway after a few questions are answered (on both sides) and worries are sorted out or settled - no baby is better than an unwanted, unplanned baby born to a 14 year old. Why the 14 year old has to take the pill in the first place is a different matter entirely - it is not the state's job to deny help to worried, uninformed teenagers. Well thats my two cents worth. God, this topic makes me so angry!
[Actually if you're under 16 it's a good idea to talk to your GP before taking any kind of surprise hormones. The pill's considered safe and effective to a pretty young age but still, if nothing else there are a number of other medications that reduce its effectiveness at any age! Your GP will usually be up on that. Still, yeah, if you're on the pill at 14 chances are you're not having *real* adult sex. Even if it's just with peers I think it's better to wait a bit. (You'll tend to enjoy it more in the long run.) Thanks, Mel. --fl]
Well, I was on the pill at 14, but I wasn't having any sex, real, adult, or otherwise. I was on it to regulate my periods because without it, I got violently ill every other month.
[Yup, safe and effective and quite a few people that age have used them with exceptionally ill effects. Oh, and don't let me sound like a curmudgeon about girls taking the pill who *do* need it for contraception. Just because I think it's better to wait doesn't mean I particularly disapprove. "Better to wait" doesn't mean "bad not to." Thanks, Amber. --fl]
Well my point is, I did wait (thought not really out of choice) - which is one of many reasons that I get so annoyed with uppity "Christians" who want to restrict access to birth control or pharmacists who won't fill it... because how do they even know what it's being used for? They don't! Someone's personal medical conditions don't need to be everyone's business.
[Even better point, Amber! I mean WTF? Is the pharmacist going to call the doctor every time and say "is this for regulation of hormone fluxuation or is your patient sexually active? Because it makes a difference whether or not I'll fill the prescription." Yeah, right. Thank you! --fl]