Ahr river
Interesting, I see shirtless men daily so it's clearly not an even thing.
Read my stories!
The Mod with the Migraine
California woman has to turn to social media
to cover $1200 bill for birth control because her HMO won't. I bet Gab knows exactly how this feels.
Rosie Wiklund, 29, said Wednesday she’s received much support and feedback on Facebook and Twitter since she began writing about how difficult it has been to access a female doctor who can prescribe an IUD, also known as an intrauterine device.
The mother of three said she wants IUD — a small, T-shaped item placed inside the uterus to prevent pregnancy — as a birth control method because she doesn’t care for the pill’s side effect and has an allergic reaction to barrier methods.
<snip>
Wiklund said she obtained health care coverage through Anthem Blue Cross and was given a referral to an OB/GYN back in May. But the physician assigned was male. Because she is a survivor of rape, Wiklund said she prefers to see a woman.
So she began the search through the web directory only to find some phone numbers had been disconnected. Other providers said they weren’t accepting Anthem HMO. And others were no longer accepting new patients. One doctor she found said she couldn’t see Wiklund until October.
“Here’s ‘THE THING’ I only ever wanted,” she wrote recently on her Facebook page. “Birth control placed within a month. And a female GP. These should be my rights. In 2015 we should never have to BEG and PLEAD for birth control or access to a female physician in the second largest city in the country.”
Wiklund said after Anthem representatives attempted to find her a female doctor, they referred her to an out-of-network provider, Planned Parenthood, for an examination and an IUD insertion. But she would have had to pay around $1,200.
<snip>
Anthem said in a statement that it takes its responsibility to provide timely access to birth control “very seriously and has made extensive efforts” on Wiklund’s behalf.
“From her initial call, Anthem found the member an appointment to see an in-network provider within seven days. At that point, the medical professionals (and not Anthem) determine how and when to prescribe birth control, including what the appropriate testing regimen is, etc.,” according to the statement.
But Wiklund said she called the office of the physician Anthem found and learned she would only have a consultation, and there would be other testing requirements that would delay insertion of the IUD. She also said she was asked if a medical student could insert the IUD.
“That was never a real appointment,” Wiklund said, which is why she requested to be seen at Planned Parenthood.
<snip>
Misleading insurance directories led California Insurance Commissioner Dave Jones to sign a set of emergency regulations earlier this year requiring health insurers to update their directories weekly and to have enough providers.
It appears to be working, said Janice Rocco, deputy commissioner for the Department of Insurance. “We are seeing the health insurers updating their directories more quickly than prior to the regulations so that policy holders have more information,“ Rocco said.
But the regulations do not cover HMO plans such as the one Wiklund carries. That falls under the department of the California Department of Managed Care.
Fuck you, Fascist sympathizers
I side with the pro-topless crowd because it is a weird double standard, but that side needs to acknowledge that years of fetishization of the female nude is going to create a difficult transitional period before this becomes seen as normal.
e.g., legalization is only going to be the first phase in the fight.
The law in the night
I'm only shirtless when I am at home and I hardly show much skin even during the summer.
Aside from the coastlines seeing bare chested men is unusual in the Brazilian countryside and South and the reaction upon seeing one varies from mild annoyance to "go put up a shirt dude".
I'll have to agree with Greenmantle, bare chested men are getting less acceptance, at least among the people who can afford a lot of clothes anyway...
I'm not bothered by breastfeeding, besides thinking that directly looking at a woman doing so to be impolite.
For being neutral it is for me the same thing I have with gay men making high pitched voices and acting feminine, I find annoying but I'd never treat one poorly for it and when someone asks me to support their rights I will gladly sign my name on it.
You don't like it? Fine, just don't restrict the liberties of the people doing it and don't support those who do want to restrict it.
Inter arma enim silent leges
A nice butterfly
You know, on the subject of public breastfeeding, I feel that both sides fear some sort of accusation from the other.
The side of "It should not happen at all", which is an extreme side that none here have professed (I think), fear that any accusation that opposes it is promoting certain behaviors, or unsavory things to behold. Which is an entirely different subject.
The side of "It should be allowed everywhere", which is another extreme side that I do not think any have professed, fear that any accusation opposite to it is an excessive measure of control that seeks to make use of a vital biological function as a means of repression.
Less extreme sides such as "I prefer if I did not have to see it" still convey the same sort of controlling, even if it does not demand it explicitly. And the less extreme sides of "It is a biological, natural and necesary thing" still kinda conveys the same sort of possibility that some nasty ass stuff is going to go on. I mean. Pooping is natural, but we don't like it in public, right?
Thing is that it has been used to control women for a long time, real badly. Women being fired, or paid less, or given less jobs they could perfectly handle if only they would be given some reasonable understanding. I do not think any woman is demanding to breastfeed their child while standing in a podium, under the glow of cameras, and giving a speech. And while the measuring controls do fuck people over, I have yet to hear a case where a drool coated tit has caused violence, short of some specific, weird subsets of pornography.
So, yeah. You know. I know they are scary but. Naked tits or drooly tits are particularly non threathening, whereas repressive measures are.
And, again, though I have yet to see someone wield this argument against it, the notion of "if we allow public breastfeeding, toplessness will be rampant next!" is ridiculous. No one goes naked even if they could. Clothing's here to stay. It's been here since bloody thousands of years, and it's not going anywhere from here to the end of the freakin' world.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
Queen of Good Things, Honest
Fuck that noise.
Yeah, I agree with this.
I remember when my BFF had to stuff her bra with lettuce for weeks to dry up after giving her kid to adoption. It was gross to hear about, I'm certain it was gross to have to do, and she never seemed comfortable for those weeks which is probably because she had lettuce stuffed in her bra.
These are things guys just don't notice. It's easy to say things like, "Just use a breast pump," because we don't know what that's like. We'll never know. It doesn't affect our lives. And for some reason, we're super-reluctant to take women at their word when they say it's awful. We've formed our own opinion on the matter and won't let the testimony of people who actually had to do it influence our stance.
Because men don't respect the opinions of women, even on matters that only women will ever have first-hand knowledge of.
If this was somewhere in the Middle East, yes. But somehow I'm having difficulty seeing American men protesting about it.
You would be amazed what American men will protest about.
The United States is currently undergoing its awkward puberty. We, as a nation, are at the point where we think BOOBIES ARE NEATO and can't stop flooding our society with pictures of them, but are also super-uncomfortable with mature expressions of sexuality or depiction of the naked human form for any purpose beyond vapid titillation.
We like boobs but we want to gawk at them from behind curtains where Papa U.K. can't see us, and the moment someone spots us we immediately cry foul and try to pass the buck, because we're sweaty and awkward and uncomfortable in our body.
We're past the Puritan-era "Girls are icky" phase but are still stuck at "Women are unicorns. Sexy unicorns."
Regarding the Topless Issue
#FreeTheNipple.
edited 27th Aug '15 10:01:32 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.
Shirtless dudes - usually laborers or at the beach.
Or beach-like events. I think we have laws forbidding dudes to go shirtless in most public places. I don't think they would get jailed or fined, but he would be asked to put a shirt on.
Also, I read up on it and breastfeeding in public is legal in vast majority of the USA. I still have to research more but right now - it looks like you can jail/fine/sue those who forbid public breastfeeding over there.
Plants are aliens, and fungi are nanomachines.
A nice butterfly
People aren't going to stop wearing clothes.
And women in this very thread can speak for themselves just how comfortable it is to wear a brassiere vs not. Particularly those in the heavier side of breast size will be thankful for their existence, at least.
Not even in the most primitive of societies do people stop adorning their bodies. Clothes serve much more of a function than shelter from cold or heat or whatever measure of "pulchritude" the current culture has. No matter the law, or the culture, I would be willing to bet that the CEO is not going to show shirtless at the big meeting, or that you will go shirtless to your date, or that the closest person you know would go shirtless to the mall.
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
You can also file a report on rape.
Doesn't mean there isn't a he'll storm of shit, humiliation, and discomfort that goes with it and even then you don't know if it will pay off or not and is small consolation in the meantime.
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
. You already have the law on your side. Use it.
Again, missing my point.
1) They shouldn't' have to use the law to begin with.
2) It isn't easy to just, start a lawsuit. You have to have money to begin it, people willing to listen to you and help you, and time and money to sustain it. And that is if you can get someone to take your case.
3) That doesn't make the potential damage and humiliation of an altercation to begin with go away.
4) This is a cultural issue that puts the responsibility for the victim to hold people accountable and that's not right.
edited 27th Aug '15 10:39:22 AM by Gabrael
"Psssh. Even if you could catch a miracle on a picture any person would probably delete it to make space for more porn." - Aszur
A nice butterfly
On other news...whoah. I did not know this thing existed. It is something made by Bayer and apparently was sorta recently approved by the FDA
Basically, sterilization for women for 3 years.
I only knew of it because Bayer is going to produce it here in my country, hosting a factory here n stuff. But I did not even know such a thing existed...
It has always been the prerogative of children and half-wits to point out that the emperor has no clothes
The law in the night
Small steps but still some progress: Qatar relaxes crew marriage and pregnancy rules
Under the new regulations, women who become pregnant are now offered temporary ground jobs and staff can also get married after notifying the company.
However, the spokeswoman for Qatar Airways said the recent changes had been brought into place after senior management began a review of working practises last year, and not in response to international criticism.
Well, you won't get those anti-breastfeeding people to cut their shit if these laws are not exercised enough.
They aren't scared of you, but they will if you know how to use the law.
They're abusing freedom of speech and outright breaking these laws. If you don't use them, they're useless.
edited 27th Aug '15 10:56:59 AM by probablyinsane
Plants are aliens, and fungi are nanomachines.
I need to think about getting that done....
How exactly is it diffrent then any other crime? Not really trying to be rude or any thing, just honestly curious.
I cant see the diffrence between how it is handled and how any other crime excet murder is handled, and in murders case it is not like the victim can take there own responsibility in the first place.
A procrastination in of itself
Knowing how to use the law is no good if you're to poor and socially rejected to actually do so.
aren't the police meant to hold people responsible? Like you report a crime to the police and they take over from there, that's very different from having to personally file an expensive lawsuit.
edited 27th Aug '15 12:47:48 PM by Silasw
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyran
Greece has it's first woman Prime Minister, though she was appointed rather than elected.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-34077933
I have never seen the police actualy do any thing without the victim keeping up the "would you please take care of it"
A procrastination in of itself
Well then your police are horrible, negligent and a complete failure.
It doesn't have to be (automatically) a lawsuit. From the articles I read, quite a bit seems to be just plain ignorance (of the law) on the part of the folks telling women to not public breastfeed.
One was a teenage lifeguard (forgot if it was a boy or girl). Another had African American woman being hassled by two African American women guards on govt. premises no less.
I also wouldn't advocate suing employees. You should just inform them (calmly at first) that it's illegal to tell-force a woman to not public breastfeed. Most people should back down once they realize that Uncle Sam isn't only not in their corner but is in the other person's corner.
If they get someone higher up the food chain, like a manager who doesn't know better either, inform them (calmly) too.
If it's a CEO or the entire company, oh... then jackpot?
Anyway, the law is quite firmly on the side of the public breastfeeding gals. See - http://www.ncsl.org/research/health/breastfeeding-state-laws.aspx
Jer gets all the girls
My old university has signs up around the place about breastfeeding in public with the headline "Of course you can!" or somesuch. They then go into more detail. I think it's a pretty good idea.
Should stuff like that become more widespread? Would it be helpful?
edited 27th Aug '15 7:26:41 PM by Murataku
Everybody's all "Jerry's old and feeble" till they see him run down a skyscraper and hijack a helicopter mid-flight.
Blowout soon fellow Stalker
Yeah totally. Breastfeeding in public is very much a cultural issue. The sooner we get over it the better.
Oh really when?
The Mod with the Migraine
Queen of Good Things, Honest
I'm gonna be that guy and ask even if a woman wasn't breastfeeding and was just jogging down the street with her boobs flopping up and down, why would that be a big deal? Why does the law need to protect us from the human body? Why can't we just not look?
This discussion has me seriously contemplating the merit of public exposure laws.
edited 28th Aug '15 9:06:15 AM by TobiasDrake
My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.
I don't know — I think here at least it's becoming less socially acceptable for a man to walk around topless.
Keep Rolling On