Sexism in the ACA repeal

The ACA, among the many things it brought, was the ability for women to finally be covered completely for birth control. This came as a huge victory as this medication is desperately needed for medical and sexual assistance. In the sexual realm it prevents unwanted pregnancies and allows parents to prepare before they bring a child into this world. On the medical sides they help with a lot of different problems from menstrual problems to hormonal imbalances. With the change in administration, and the further crusade to repeal the ACA, there has been a more conservative approach to this with a very sexist agenda. The new healthcare repeal and replacement takes away the coverage of birth control and leaves it to the decision of the insurance companies individually. On the opposite side of this, we see that male sexual enhancement drugs like Viagra are completely mandated to be covered. The absurdity of this is baffling to anyone, left or right, but it falls inherently with the common underlying attitude that our social system has had for women for decades. This edict is that, we do not empower women with the idea of responsibility in sex. Instead we subjugate women with that idea. Men on the other hand are viewed as the control over the ability for women to reproduce. Condoms and male enhancement is a topic of social conversation, media display and pride while in the other case birth control is the topic of discretion and seriousness. The attitudes have been different for quite some time and when conservatives came into power over this issue, the wave of change for the better has ceased. The biggest issue in this department is that there are no women involved in that conversation, it is only decided by old white men. Birth control is simply seen as necessary and something that people need to pay for like condoms, which is extremely short sighted as condoms aren't used medically. Viagra is marketed to be a cure for a deficiency or a medical problem and cause men to get cardiovascular screenings which to the uninformed is far greater of an advantage compared to birth control. Men are only seen as the gender to have fun and be safe with nothing really at stake as we have shown, while women carry this burden walking into the age of sexual maturity. This dynamic has to end culturally and then it will further proceed to end in laws and in actions.

Who Sponsors Nutrition?

In the United States we have a very interesting system when it comes to nutritional guidelines and who creates them. Many people would think it’s a bunch of smart looking guys holding up tubes and tests to find out what makes humans function, but really it happens in boardrooms. Most nutritional guidelines we have in this country are made with the food industries behind them in mind. A great example of this is the dairy industry and how 2 servings of dairy a day became a staple of the American diet. This comes as a very surprising fact as humans don’t need dairy, 25% can’t even consume it and it has even been shown to be terrible at providing calcium to stop fractures. In World War II however dairy was very useful in feeding our troops and fueling the battlegrounds of Europe and japan and as a result the Army bought so much and farmers invested intensely in cows to produce milk. After the war was over there was millions of dollars in left over milk and cattle that were never used in the war but had to be utilized in some manner or it would spoil. A good portion of that milk was given to school lunch programs to fit a dairy requirement that the Dairy industry lobbied congress for. Ever since the post-world war II milk surpluses we had a section of our lives carved for milk because a corporation said we needed to for it to make money. This isn’t because of nutrition or any wholesome reason, solely profit. This same thing was done with the food pyramid in the section of 12 servings of grains every day. The industries that were behind that were the sugar and corn industries that lobbied congress to believe skewed and biased research with the end result being the overconsumption of carbohydrates. The profit margins for corn products and bread went up significantly and the government bought into it to send to schools as well, which would end up cheaper than more expensive products like meat and produce. Even today we overconsume on carbohydrates and we allow soda companies to advertise everywhere like they are not one of the root causes of the obesity epidemic. These are not relics of the 90’s and early 2000’s they still continue to this day. As a result we the people suffer instead of corporations. In government researched health systems like Scandinavian countries, they opt for heavier protein and fat diets with high amounts of vegetables and fruits, an opposite tune than the one the US subscribes to. As a result they are healthier as a country and the economics on marketing food is not as big of a deal over there as it is compared to here.