Last month, I wrote a story on why the government won’t fund local youth AIDS prevention group WAIT (or Washington AIDS International Teens). WAIT’s problem was this:

a. Their goal was stopping the spread of HIV.

b. Their methodology was abstinence.

c. The government only funds one or the other.

Last week, President Obama proposed to add another roadblock to their fight for funding by cutting abstinence-only cash from the budget altogether.

Now, groups like WAIT, which represent the most practical side of abstinence eduction—delaying sex only to prevent an uncurable deadly disease—will remain, well, pretty much unaffected. As I detailed in my piece, federally-funded abstinence-only education was always itself too much of a “comprehensive” strategy. In order to receive federal funding, abstinence groups couldn’t just work against AIDS—they also had to teach prevention of “out-of-wedlock pregnancy”; that “a mutually faithful monogamous relationship in context of marriage is the expected standard of human sexual activity”; and that “sexual activity outside of the context of marriage is likely to have harmful psychological and physical effects.”

So while proponents of comprehensive sex education rejoice at the White House rule, some abstinence advocates, at least, aren’t lamenting the move: abstinence’s realists have always been left behind.

Photo by Darrow Montgomery.

In a blog post entitled Sigh . . ., El Guapo in DC makes his triumphant return by lamenting the mass exodus of high-heel wearing ladies from the district. “Ballerina flats,” he writes. “Si, ballerina shoes. The women of DC have for some reason turned to wearing ballerina shoes. Have they done this to spite me? I think so. Is this their way of telling me that I’ve mistreated women in the past? Lo siento. En serio, I’m sorry. Please, por favor, put the heels back on. I cannot take this anymore.”

El Guapo shies from outright blaming the return of “the footwear equivalent of sweatpants” on “that Latino president that is in the White House (Yes, he’s part Guatemalan. No black man is that smooth).”

“I don’t want to point fingers,” he writes. “No fingers pointing at Obama. But there were no ugly ballerina shoes when Bush was in town. All heels. All the time. . . . Please bring the heels back. You look horrible. Seriously.”

Okay. I’ll bite. Are Democratic women more likely to wear flat shoes? I voted for Obama, and have never worn any shoe north of a half-inch heel for more than a very uncomfortable afternoon. Coincidence? Probably.

But aren’t Democratic women more likely to be hippies, who are more likely to ride bikes, which are more likely to require flat feet [Fig. 1]?

FIGURE 1:

OBAMA —> HIPPIES —> BICYCLES —> BALLERINA SHOES

Bushies, on the other hand, were rich enough to not have to care about the environment, OR to display their token hippiedom by using special lightbulbs and staging charity balls for trees, to which they traveled in taxis, which are far more accomodating of the high heel [Fig. 2].

FIGURE 2:

BUSH —> $$$ —> LIGHTBULBS/ CHARITY BALLS —> TAXIS —> HIGH HEELS

Proof.

Photo by Kekka

Tomorrow marks the end of the 30-day comment period on Obama’s proposed scrapping of Bush’s so-called “conscience rule.” Bush snuck the conscience rule in at the end of his godforsaken presidency to allow all healthcare providers to deny services (or “abortions”) to patients (or “women) based on their moral beliefs (or “misogyny”). Obama swiftly moved to resciend the rule; Shakesville has the deets on how to speak up as to  why it should stay that way:

Go to the ACLU Action Center here, or visit Planned Parenthood’s action page here, or Compassion & Choices’ action page here, all of whom have made it incredibly easy to make your voice heard by the Obama administration.

If all goes according to plan, the conscience rule will have accomplished nothing at all. Mwa ha ha.

The AP reports that President Obama has invited more than 100 gay and lesbian families to attend the White House Easter Egg Roll. The majority of tickets are offered online to the public (and sell out within seconds), but the President reserves a number for special guests. From the AP:

Read More “Gay Families to Attend White House Easter Egg Roll . . . Again and Again and Again” »

What’s worse than being a victim of one of the 2,688 “reported sexual assaults involving military personnel” in 2007? How about not being able to access emergency contraception following your assault?

Last week, a federal judge required that pharmacies offer emergency contraception over-the-counter to 17-year-olds (previously, it was only available to women 18 and up, with identification). Reproductive Health Reality Check reminds us that there’s still a whole sector of adult women who may not be able to access the morning-after pill: Servicewomen. Writes Nancy Northup:

Read More “Military Bases Still Not Required to Stock Emergency Contraception” »

Not Set in Stone: Bush’s rule never saw the light.

For a short period this year, healthcare providers across the country were free to follow their consciences. President Bush’s final act in office was something known as the “conscience rule,” a provision meant to protect workers in federally funded facilities from providing services they found morally objectionable. The rule went into effect on Jan. 20, the day its ultimate destroyer took over. The Obama administration allowed consciences a one-month leash before announcing its intention to reverse the rule in early April, following a 30-day comment period.

Read More “Decline and Fall: The Fallout of the “Conscience Rule”” »

Health and Human Services published President Obama’s official proposal to rescind Bush’s “conscience rule” in the Federal Register today. Bush’s rule expanded protections for healthcare providers who are morally opposed to performing or aiding in certain procedures—abortions, sterilizations, birth-control prescriptions, treating gays and lesbians, etc.

For the next 30 days, the public is invited to comment on Obama’s proposed rescission of the rule. Love it? Hate it? Tell the Obama administration through one of four easy ways (no faxes, n00bs). Once Health and Human Services opens comments for review, I’ll post the highlights here on the blog. And stay tuned for this week’s City Paper, where I’ll have more on the short-lived regulation.

For now, get to commentin’! Instructions are after the jump:

Read More “Comment on Obama’s Reversal of the “Conscience Rule”” »

And yet, those who provide them never get any love.

Today is National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers.

Yes, but how? Five ways to appreciate, after the jump:

Read More “National Day of Appreciation for Abortion Providers” »