For your consideration: a nationwide women's action: "Not Tonight, Dear."

[calimary]

I am just SERIOUSLY getting pissed off about this forced ultrasound, vaginal probe business. HOW DARE THEY!!?!?!?!?? Aren't these the same people running around all over the place bellowing about the "URGENT" need to "shrink the government down small enough that you can drown it in a bathtub?" How small a government did they have in mind? Penis-size, maybe? Makes me wonder if women should respond with a nationwide, ONGOING "Not Tonight, Dear" campaign. Ongoing until this crap STOPS. You're not gettin' any UNTIL THIS CRAP STOPS.

I'm totally serious. I think we ought to start talking about something like this, and agitating about something like this, or at least make 'em think we are. These proposals and outrages and vile intrusions are bills overwhelmingly introduced, sponsored, and furthered, by men. The male chair (darrell issa) of that stupid committee they said was about some smarmy religious touchy-feely was about NOTHING ELSE than access to contraception and the rationalization of restricting and withholding it. That's ALL it was ever about!!! And NO women were invited onto the panel. Deliberately. That was no sloppy mistake on the part of some aide.

I think we should harness the mushrooming anger and outrage that is coming from women everywhere, from coast-to-coast. Give it a voice and give it a concrete action it can take - that makes it physical, personal, and as direct as all hell. And yes. Take the fight to the enemy by hitting squarely below the belt. Eye-to-eye, chest-to-chest, body-to-body.

That is, of course, unless the woman's lover, partner or spouse is progressive in his/her thinking and supportive of a woman's right not merely to choose, but the right to have physical dignity, the right to privacy especially as it affects the MOST INTIMATE AND HIGHLY-PERSONAL area of her body forcryingoutloud!!!! I'm glad I have a husband who can be completely exempted from this punitive "okay, pal, if this is how you wanna play..." protest. And I feel very fortunate. He's as much of an ardent feminist as I am. And like me, he too has a daughter of child-bearing age. He doesn't want Big Brother Government intruding into her private decisions anymore than he ever wanted that for me.

Should also be buttressed in other ways, such as the few-but-increasing cases of bills being introduced that would place Viagra under the same insurance access restrictions, and one attempt I heard about, I think in Virginia, that called for any man wanting insurance coverage for Viagra prescriptions would have to submit to various forms of genital exams. I think we have to start hitting them where it hurts. The figurative, political-metaphor version of "kick 'em in the nuts" that's routinely taught in women's self-defense classes. It's long past time to STRIKE BACK.

Women all over America should start forcing that damn door to swing both ways!!!! And yeah, we have to force it. No more nice.

I'd love your thoughts.

[ProfessionalLeftist]

1. I wonder if anyone has proposed this to Occupy, MoveOn, NARAL, PP

or other groups? If it went national, it could have an impact - both "Not Tonight Dear" and counter-bills that propose placing Viagra under the same restrictions, outlawing vasectomies, requiring prostate or anal exams for them, etc. etc. Give 'em a taste of their own crap.

[kestrel91316]

2. Oh, we're all about taking action over on FB.

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Womens-Day-to-Say-Enough/297512763644239

[calimary]

5. There's also this:

http://www.facebook.com/UniteWomen?sk=wall

[ProfessionalLeftist]

14. Ohh. Thanks! n/t

[calimary]

4. Don't know. But I'm just fed up with this! I wanna force some damn CONSEQUENCES

on the men behind this shit. And it's invariably men! darrell issa's all-male revue, the blunt amendment, bob VAGINAL-PROBE mcdonnell, and the rest of 'em. So I think they should start reaping the whirlwind for what they're starting here. Taking it in the shorts, in this case!

[crunch60]

8. Yup, men required to have a penis probe before getting an RX for viagra. Got to find

the Real reason for the Limp Dick, got to make sure men aren't using it just to enhance their sexual pleasure. God forbid!

I believe the FBI defines RAPE, as "Penetration without Consent". So women can file a lawsuits if a Dr. tries to use the O' probe on her, without consent. I certainly would not consent to it.

[calimary]

34. I think some of our reps in DC should start another line of attack as well:

Okay, this "conscience" thing????

Well, alright then. Game on. I'm thoroughly against war on moral grounds, indeed also on religious grounds. So I'm introducing a bill that allows all opponents of military aggression to deduct 50% of their income tax bill because they don't want their tax dollars going to the Pentagon. How 'bout THAT? You want "conscience" waivers? Okay! You GOT 'em!!!!

How I would LOVE to hear one of our Senators or Congresscritters step up and do this! Just as some legislators at the state level have begun introducing legislation or adding amendments that call for men who expect insurance coverage for their Viagra prescriptions to undergo a state-mandated penile probe or proctological exam. Turn the tables. Turnabout is fair play. Goose, gander, and sauce, and all that. If they do it to us, WE show 'em how it feels to be on the receiving end of this shit.

[Ship of Fools]

26. I feel the same way.

Unfortunately, I'm here in blood-red Kansas. These jackasses are dug in --
I don't think it will EVER be possible to vote them out.

So, I write them. Constantly. I think I'm in their trash bin, however,
because I cannot for the life of me keep my anger in check (lots of
f-bombs, sadly. Can't help myself...) Oddly enough, I have gotten three
calls from Yoder to join in his town hall meetings. This was after
I told his office that my husband has publicly stated that the GOP has left him
and now he's a Dem all the way (about time). Yay.

[TreasonousBastard]

3. "Lysistrata"

[Ilsa]

6. And after the legislators

Back off on raping desperate women, we can work on brining all the troops home!

[AnnieBW]

10. My wonderful husband

just suggested the same thing.

[catrose]

12. My thoughts exactly <eom>

[hifiguy]

25. That was my first thought, too.

IIRC, it worked.

[lonestarnot]

7. That has been the answer all along. See who comes to their milk then!

[Honeycombe8]

9. That bill got me incensed, too. It is unbelievable to have this going on in the 21st century!

I'm past the age where it'll directly influence me, but I shudder to think about the rights of younger women being affected this way. And it's an affront to ALL women to have the govt direct ANY of us to undergo medical procedures to force us to do or not do other things.

They must be stopped! Thank God we have some women in Congress. We need MORE women in Congress!

[Nye Bevan]

11. But wouldn't the woman be punishing herself as well as her partner?

My wife, for one, would be very unenthusiastic about this form of protest.

[niyad]

13. are you voting in favour of any of these woman-hating bills? if not, you should be okay

[treestar]

17. Yes. The whole idea partakes of the same sexism

The idea that women use sex as a reward.

[lunatica]

19. Well, women are being attacked directly in their genitals with the trans-vaginal probe

Do you have a better suggestion as to how to fight back? Or should they just shut up and spread eagle rather than get sexist about it?

What would you call the men who are doing this?

[treestar]

22. There must be some other way - letter writing, marches, protests

Spread legs for who? It would be punishing the wrong men. The ones who are behind this are likely to be with women who are OK with it - you know, Republican women like Bachmann and Palin. So liberal men pay while conservative ones don't.

And again, you're partaking of the idea that sex is for men. It's something they like and "get" while it's something women use and "give."

[lunatica]

29. You can't be more mistaken

It is an idiotic idea to think that women are going to punish the wrong men. The very reason women are advocating this is to get men to support them. Why would any woman want to withhold sex from a man who supports her rights?

Really.

[Withywindle]

31. But that's exactly the problem with it.

If I refused to have sex with rightwing, misogynist men....it would have no effect at all, because I do that ANYWAY. It would be like if I "boycotted" licorice for some political reason--I can't stand the stuff and never buy it to begin with, so who'd notice?


Aren't the majority of people in relationships with people who share their core values in some way? I'd certainly think that probably most people on DU are.

I also agree with those who say that withholding sex, used as a weapon, plays into some really gross stereotypes that are misogynist in and of themselves.

[calimary]

32. Certainly not! Our husbands, partners, lovers who support us in this - are all exempt.

I'm suggesting this for the unfortunate ones who are shackled to political troglodytes. There should be a price to pay for wanting to drag us all back into the caves by our hair.

[Major Nikon]

15. That still wouldn't remove the option of renting or toe tapping in public restrooms

So I'm not sure how effective that would be against Republican lawmakers.

[Ship of Fools]

16. I'm beginning to see red, too.

I can barely read about this shit that is happening without finding my
jaw clenched and my teeth grinding away ...

IMO, though, I think women turning out in huge numbers in front of
their reps office all over the place will be the most effective. The *Not Tonight, Dear*
idea is clever, but it could put women in this light of being kind of
these manipulative creatures, insubordinate, disrespectful to the big bad hubby, etc. --
at least I think some could interpret it that way.

Huge numbers, everywhere. Personally, I've always been a fan of silent protests and
will suggest them as often as I can to anyone listening.
Every last one of them -- "Listen for the damned pindrop, people!!!"
Not only does it put a fine point on the excellent organizing ability of GAs,
but it could help to isolate Black Bloc as well.

Just one woman's random thoughts/opinions...

[lunatica]

20. Don't you think those same people already see us as manipulative?

I sure do.

[Ship of Fools]

24. Oh, absoLUTEly they do. No question!!!!

I just think we should not add fuel to that fire. I think it would be more
effective to protest this under the umbrella of OWS. Maybe during the
next big protest, somewhere, have all the women in front of the *line*,
or better yet, marching inside the group, perhaps with placards reading
all the same ... Solidarity within solidarity (or something
like that...) Nothing like visuals to get the point across.

[lunatica]

30. I hope that's one of the many ways we should do it

I don't have a partner and I'm past menopause, but I can sure add my voice to the protests.

[HughBeaumont]

18. I think these bills are about as overreaching as you can get without actually being in the bedroom.

But I'm in what most sex therapists and counselors call a "Sexless Marriage" (10 - 12 times a year).

"Not Tonight, Dear" is pretty much every night and weekend for me. Right now, I'm going on 3 weeks. I don't even bother asking during the week because I know what the answer will be. A few years ago, it was far worse . . . we're talking it wouldn't have been unusual to go MONTHS without sex.

So if this is a protest, I wouldn't know the difference.

[lunatica]

21. Is this protest needed against you?

See, not all men are evil. Many of them are quite decent human beings. Women aren't protesting the wars like Lysistrata did. We're protesting the assault and legalized rape of our bodies.

If you are on the women's side of this issue then why would this type of protest be used against you?

[Bake]

23. Cut. Them. Off.

If their wives had any ounce of dignity, these Thugs would never again get even CLOSE to sex. Cut them off. NOW.

Bake

[DiverDave]

27. Why should my wife have an excuse?

just askin...

[HappyMe]

28. This makes no sense to me.

You are under the assumption that women don't enjoy sex. That it is a commodity to be traded; i.e. give me what I want and I'll sleep with you. Sexist and stereotypical.

Not having sex with my sweetie punishes me as well.

Petitions, marches are probably a better idea.

[calimary]

33. That's okay. It's a suggestion. And from your post I'm guessing your sweetie is an enlightened one.

There'd be no reason for a symbolic boycott. My husband's certainly one of those - he's extremely intelligent and broadminded.

I just think there should be consequences OF ALL KINDS for this kind of 13th Century thinking. These bastards push this stuff because they can, because there's no push-back of any note - at least up til lately, that is. There HAVE TO BE consequences for this type of thinking. Because having none means this behavior is tacitly viewed as okay. It's okay to prey upon women, victimize them, and deny them their rights, or do everything you can to roll back and/or nulllify their rights. I don't believe in reinforcing bad behavior. I didn't do that as a parent, with my children. For the same reason, I'm supporting the following, too (boycotting rush lamebrain and calling on his sponsors to stop supporting his accursed radio show:

http://act.weareultraviolet.org/sign/proflowersrush/?akid=39.265687.2qSC-t&rd=1&t=1

I think we have to strike from ALL SIDES, ALL CORNERS. That's what the bad guys do to us - keeping us busy and practically dizzy trying to keep up with all the assaults on the progress we've made. Time to turn the tables.

For a LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOONG time, here on DU, I've been a proud advocate of returning fire for fire. Taste of their own medicine. See how they like it. Having shoved it back in the face of at least two bullies in my life, I've seen personally, from practical application, that it's a technique that WORKS. It CHECKS the bad behavior. It gets their attention. And it has more of an impact the harder and more uncomfortable it hits home. I WANT this to hurt. In the link here, for example, I WANT this to hurt limbaugh, to cut into his earnings, to make him look bad and more of a liability than he's worth in the eyes of his sponsors. I WANT him to feel the sting (and indeed, also the taste) of the shit he spews. To do nothing sends the opposite message - reinforcing the idea that the offensive behavior is somehow okay and in no need of response or checking or curtailing or condemning. You know that famous meditation from the World War II era - "When they came for the trade unionists, I didn't say anything because I wasn't a trade unionist..."

There should be MANY attack strategies coming from every direction imaginable. So if you're not comfortable with one, you have other options and choices.