What is a feminist?
According to a couple of sources, “a person whose beliefs
and behavior are based on feminism” [1], and/or someone who advocates “social,
political, legal, and economic rights for women equal to those of men” [2].
I have been called a feminist before. I’m not too sure why
but based on the latter definition I can see the parallels between a so-called
feminist and myself. However, I have never considered myself a feminist because
of the issues attached to feminism nowadays (e.g., pro-choice abortion advocates
and free birth control). If you know me, I clearly do not champion most of the
mainstream issues the modern feminist does.
However, though, I recently had a conversation that made me
take a second look at feminism. I spoke with a professor who told me she
considers herself to be an individualist and ‘traditional’ feminist. What does
that mean? According to her, it is a female who believes men and females should
have equal rights; however, she pointed out, there is a clear difference
between being equal and receiving special treatment. She went on to say that
the leaders of the feminist movement today have highjacked the movement using victimization of women in order to further their agenda. Hmmm.. I don’t
like to use the word ‘agenda’ because it’s overused and often an exaggeration.
Regardless, I agree with her. There is no pride in victimizing women in order
to attain a particular goal. How is receiving entitlement birth control
equality? As ‘independent’ women who champion equality, shouldn’t we want to be
able to take care of ourselves? After all, we are capable and successful.
I would also like to address the infamous ‘War on Women’
supposedly lead by the Catholic Church and Republican Party. In my opinion, we shouldn’t be having
this conversation because there are more pressing matters (i.e., our country is
on the verge of an economic collapse as a result of our national debt and
endless spending habits). But people are shouting about this from all angles (e.g., feminists, religious freedom advocates & Democrats), so I am
going to acknowledge it. The ‘War on Women’ is just a bunch of propaganda used
to get women riled up about their equality. If you want to see inequality, go
to some areas in the Middle East where women are mutilated and treated like criminals if they
disobey men. Women have it made in this country! When did ‘special privileges’
become ‘equality’? When did religious freedom no longer matter? Why should the Catholic Church be obligated to provide free birth control in their insurance plans for employees if it violates the teachings of the Church? The First Amendment is pretty clear about religious freedom. As for the Republican Party, well they are the Republican Party and of course they are going to oppose anything that violates the Bill of Rights.
And, no, I do not believe individuals are ‘entitled’ to
health care. I believe there are three things an individual is entitled to in a
free society: life, liberty, and property. So, you won’t sell me on that
argument. Sure, free healthcare would be nice but what are the consequences? If
the government forces citizens to use its health care via a particular insurance
company, there’s no competition. Competition is good because it provides
products or services of value for the best price. I’m not even kidding.
Check it out. Do you remember how they sell overpriced
hotdogs and water bottles at football games, movies, or any type of event that
is enclosed? The ones where you’re not allowed to bring outside food or
beverages? Things are overpriced mainly because there is no competition. The
people selling food and water can charge whatever prices they want because people
have no choice other than to purchase it or stay hungry/thirsty. If there were additional vendors that charged less, people would purchase their food and water with the additional vendors. Then, the original vendors would have to lower their prices in order to get
people to purchase their food and water. It’s actually really simple. The
aforementioned example is not even that bad of a scenario because at least
people can choose not to purchase these overpriced items in the absence of
competition. Obamacare takes it to another level and forces citizens to
purchase health insurance or else... taxation. Come again? This is in
the land of the free? Aha. Anyway, do you see what I am saying? Competition is
a good thing because it allows for reasonable prices.
So, it’s not the end of the world if you do not have health
care. Back in the day, churches and other ‘individuals’ helped each other out.
The government’s role is actually intended to be very limited according to the
Constitution. Don’t get me wrong, I am all for helping one another. I just
believe in doing it through individual, voluntary efforts. Force should never
be used in a free society. People make fun of Romney because he
infamously said, “Corporations are people.” Well, I do not agree that
corporations are people but I would like to point out that governments are not people either. So, how is it
that government is going to do something that only people can actually do? Who
is specifically accountable for the efforts of the government if it fails at
providing ‘free’ stuff? (Nothing is free, for the record). The taxpayers will
surely feel the consequences because the government uses taxpayer money to fund
government programs. And guess what, government has a record of being inefficient
and ineffective at doing things. For example, ‘No Child Left Behind’ is a total
failure. Need I say more?
Anyway, what I'm basically trying to say is that I know it is
possible to live without free birth control (i.e., the pill). In fact, I was
told to get on the pill for health reasons but I declined. Why? For one, I don’t
like the thought of taking in additional estrogen. Second, I don’t like to take
things that are unnatural. So, whatever did I do? I did some research on the
Internet (so convenient sometimes) and found out that regular exercise and a
healthy diet would actually do the trick. Who would have thought? I also found
minerals that helped out too. See, there are alternatives to the pill in the
scenario of health. Sometimes a little research will do the trick. Now, I am no
medical doctor but I am certain that there will be a condition out there that
does require the pill. Obviously, if it’s life or death… I’m sure you will make
the right choice. But that's the beauty of freedom. People like me don't have to take the pill and others can if they choose to.
I'm aware I have digressed.
So what is my point? My point is that feminists do not have a case for free birth control. I also hope that you realize victimization of women, and minority groups for that matter, is not empowering at all. Let us stop grouping ourselves and just live life as individuals who like freedom FOR ALL. Sure you might experience sexism or racism. But guess what, there are ignorant people in the world. Be very thankful that you are not prejudice. Moreover, you may believe you are being a good person by supporting Obamacare but wouldn’t it make you an even better person if you actually did something at to help out personally? Just putting that out there.
So what is my point? My point is that feminists do not have a case for free birth control. I also hope that you realize victimization of women, and minority groups for that matter, is not empowering at all. Let us stop grouping ourselves and just live life as individuals who like freedom FOR ALL. Sure you might experience sexism or racism. But guess what, there are ignorant people in the world. Be very thankful that you are not prejudice. Moreover, you may believe you are being a good person by supporting Obamacare but wouldn’t it make you an even better person if you actually did something at to help out personally? Just putting that out there.
[1] http://www.thefreedictionary.com/feminist
[2] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/feminist?s=t
"And, no, I do not believe individuals are ‘entitled’ to health care. I believe there are three things an individual is entitled to in a free society: life, liberty, and property."
ReplyDeleteYour second clause contradicts the first. Access to healthcare is liberty. In the most advanced civil society, affordable (or free) healthcare should absolutely be a fundamental human right. This notion is no different then access to education, police, or firefighters. What separates healthcare from this class? The free market should not be the end all to every solution. While i understand that you believe more gov't decreases liberty, I view it as an increase in my liberties. I had the privilege to attend public schools through college, I have a small business in which i employ a wonderful set of people who have had the same privilege. I am currently accessing the internet, which without a doubt has increased the information we as the public have available to us - an absolute increase in liberty. The internet is of course was created by the gov't. This idea that the free market alone can solve all problems is absurd. The market enterprise system and the government are not mutually exclusive. There are no pre-political markets. Markets are inevitably shaped and channeled through public policies. Markets frequently trample on valued social priorities about which large number of citizens care deeply - from clean water to the just treatment of workers (not because markets are evil, but because they are profit driven). When markets are imbalanced, the gov't has a responsibility to intervene and provide for the welfare of its citizens. The debate should not be over whether gov't is involved in the formation of markets (for better or worse they always will be) but rather if the manner the gov't is involved is conducive to a good society.
"So, it’s not the end of the world if you do not have health care. Back in the day, churches and other ‘individuals’ helped each other out."
For many it can be. Medical expenses are the number one leading cause of bankruptcy in this country [1]. Do you really think churches and others are helping pay $100,000 in outstanding medical bills? Who ends up paying for those medical bills when people file for bankruptcy? Taxpayers.
[1] http://www.clearbankruptcy.com/financial-literacy/10-leading-causes-of-bankruptcy.aspx
Healthcare is not a fundamental human right. Healthcare, just like any service or product, can never truly be free. Knowledge about basic economics would help you better understand this.
DeleteAccess to healthcare is a choice or option, not a fundamental human right. I'll use myself as an example. I can either choose to purchase healthcare or not purchase it. I can think of two things that would influence my choice: income and health. So, I can choose not to purchase my own health insurance because I'd rather spend my money on other things, or I can choose to purchase it because I value my health more than other things. Regardless of the option I choose, I am NOT being oppressed. 'Liberty,' by definition, is "the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one's way of life, behavior, or political views." Oppression would occur if someone either prevented or forced me to purchase health insurance (e.g., Obamacare).
I understand you have a different view of government. You use public schools and college as examples. Are you aware that as government becomes more involved in public education, quality of public education decreases? I can't even count the number of times I have heard teachers say, "I left teaching because the system is horrible" [referring to No Child Left Behind]. And you also mention college. Sure, I appreciate my college education too (to a certain extent). But what I would appreciate more is lower tuition and no student loan debt. Prior to the Higher Education Act 1965, college was affordable and student paid their own way. Colleges had to compete on various levels, including keeping tuition affordable via lower tuition prices. How would college survive is students could not afford to pay tuition? They wouldn't. So, while student loans per the government provide the illusion that college is affordable, college is actually NOT affordable. If the government stopped giving out school loans or grants next semester, I assure you a lot of students would not be able to return to college. T
You say you are a small business owner. I'm not sure when you started your business or what type of business you own but it is actually government regulations that make it more difficult to start your own business nowadays. These regulations are so bad that even Apple (extremely wealthy company) exports its jobs to China because it's too expensive to manufacture products in the U.S. It's not as a result of greed, it's just the way the market works. People want to pay low prices, right? So, Apple has two options: (1) either pay its employees less in a different country and have lower prices for consumers, OR (2) pay employees more but also charge consumers higher prices. A business owner will do what they have to to stay in business. That is not selfish at all. That is self-interest, human nature to be quite frank.
You say that government created the Internet, which is true. But have you heard of SOPA, PIPA, ACTA or any of the other bills that congress is trying to pass in order to censor the Internet? I agree, the Internet is a very powerful form of communication, which allows us to educate ourselves. But I'm sure that's why they are trying to censor it now.
In my opinion, economics is intertwined in mostly everything we do. I could respond to each of your comments but for the sake of time, I will just recommend a book for you to read. It's called 'The Morality of Capitalism' (edited by Tom Palmer) and 'Basic Economics' by Thomas Sowell. There are various examples demonstrating how capitalism is the best system humankind has known. You can take my recommendation or not.
Everything in society can be categorized as a product or service. There are some products and services however, that a civil society must, and should see to it that its citizens are provided. At a very minimum the government offers a certain bundle of goods, so that those at the lower echelons of society do not suffer without. The justification for this can be found in Article 1, Sec. 8 of the Constitution, which states that the government shall “[p]rovide for the general welfare of the United States”
ReplyDeleteWhile I am sure you are familiar with these public services, examples include, environmental protections, law enforcement, libraries, schools, telecommunications, roads, waste management. These are all “services and products” by every definition of the meanings. However, we as a society have decided these things are so paramount to a civil and advanced society, that we want to make sure no person goes without them. You are correct though, none of these things can ever truly be free, but as a society and through our legislatures we have made the decision that we are willing to spend our tax dollars to ensure these objectives are accomplished.
My question then reframed to you, is why shouldn’t healthcare be in this class. Why are you complacent with a large segment of our country not being able to afford healthcare? What separates healthcare from all these things we as a society have said to ourselves are so important, that we cannot let a single person go without?
There is an important distinction that needs to be made between healthcare and health insurance. The latter is simply a product designed to ensure that you can cover your medical expenses in case of an unexpected accident or illness. The former is the actual service provided by medical providers. The Affordable Health Care Act (Obamacare) is far from perfect. The AHCA forces you to go into the market and purchase health insurance. You and I can find common ground in our belief that AHCA is bad policy. However given the state of being between what was the status quo before AHCA, mainly insurers ability to deny individuals for preexisting conditions, was simply unacceptable.
I am not sure how you felt about the former regime of healthcare in this country, but we cannot sit by and say it is acceptable to go on in supposedly the most prosperous nation in the word have 50.7 million people be uninsured, many of whom were denied because of preexisting conditions [1]. From a moral and ethical standpoint we simply cannot allow that. There is no better system then a public option, so that those with the less means in this country have access to medical care. This would not supplant private medical providers, who can continue to offer premium and superior services to those who can afford it. This situation is analogous to the ability for children across America to attend public or private schools depending on their social status.
“Are you aware that as government becomes more involved in public education, quality of public education decreases?”
ReplyDeleteUnless you can provide me with a proper source for this proposition, I will assume this an opinion. Also what is your metric of “quality”?
“If the government stopped giving out school loans or grants next semester, I assure you a lot of students would not be able to return to college.”
Are you OK with this? Did you rely on loans or grants to get you through school?
“These regulations are so bad that even Apple (extremely wealthy company) exports its jobs to China because it's too expensive to manufacture products in the U.S”
What regulations are you referring to specifically? There is an interesting article that discusses the reasons why Apple’s manufacturing takes place in China [2]. It is mainly due to the availability of parts and supply chains, i.e. every competent not made by Apple that goes into assembling Apple’s goods, are already made in China. Moreover, the Foxconn factories where Apple’s products are made houses thousands of workers who live in the factory full time in deplorable conditions. [2] I take pride in the fact that my government regulates companies from forcing Americans into working 16-20 hour shifts and pay them $4 a day.
[1] http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-09-17-uninsured17_ST_N.htm
[2] http://theweek.com/article/index/223580/why-apple-builds-iphones-and-everything-else-in-china
[3] http://micgadget.com/29723/the-undercover-report-on-how-the-new-iphone-5-is-made-inside-foxconn-factory/
PS. A little courtesy and politeness will get you a long way in life. I understand you and young and passionate about this stuff but remember that there are no absolute right and wrongs. Y
ReplyDeleteAlso, I'm not sure what exactly you are going for on this blog, but i would reduce the amount of personal anecdotes. They are the least persuasive form of communication.