fuck yeah sex education

Sex Positive and Body Positive educational place. Includes information about different relationships, genders, sexuality, sexual preferences, safety precautions and everything else that could pertain in the education of sex. Accepting of all walks of life.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask on my ask site: http://fyseq.tumblr.com/ask, though check out http://fuckyeahsexeducation.tumblr.com/FAQ!

Lawmaker Barred After Vagina Comment



File under: this would be funny if it weren’t so fucking sad.

Michigan House Republicans prohibited state Rep. Lisa Brown (D) from speaking on the floor after she ended a speech against a bill restricting abortions by referencing her female anatomy, the Detroit News reports.

Said Brown: “Finally, Mr. Speaker, I’m flattered that you’re all so interested in my vagina, but ‘no’ means ‘no.’”

Republicans said Brown was “offensive” and wouldn’t allow her to voice her opinion on a school employee retirement bill.

Responded Brown: “If I can’t say the word vagina, why are we legislating vaginas? What language should I use?”

Conservative men are so scared of us claiming ownership over our own anatomy they won’t even let us name it, yet they’re allowed to play porno music and joke about getting shut down by their wives during a session about forcing people seeking abortions to undergo transvaginal ultrasounds.

Update on Forced Ultrasound Laws


Virginia is now the 8th state with forced ultrasounds before abortion. When it passed its law, it joined Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas

Texas has the harshest forced ultrasound law currently in effect. As Andrea Grimes reported,

“Texas has the most extreme law that’s being enforced right now,” says the Center For Reproductive Rights’ Julie Rikelman, the lead attorney on the CRR’s lawsuit filed against the Texas legislation. Despite the sympathetic leanings of a federal district judge who initially ruled on the case, the suit has more or less been stalled by a vehemently anti-choice Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which denied the CRR’s requested injunction against enforcement last month.  Now, that means that all aspects of the law—mandated ultrasounds, 24-hour waiting periods, and forced speech—are now in full force in Texas.

Oklahoma’s forced ultrasound bill, which was similar to TX’s, was struck down by a federal court recently.

North Carolina, which also has passed a harsh TX-style forced ultrasound bill, is unable to enforce their law pending a court decision.

Pennsylvania’s forced ultrasound bill is officially kaput, at least for this year.

And, as Robin Marty reports, Iowa:

What is the difference between a traffic light camera and a mandatory trans-vaginal ultrasound?  One is a violation of privacy, according to Iowa legislators.

Can you guess which?

The Iowa legislature is considering banning traffic cameras due to “privacy concerns.”  And those who are arguing for the ban are the same who think all women should be forced to undergo forced ultrasounds prior to an abortion.

(via thecuntmentality)

Weekly News Roundup


Here are a few stories we’ve been paying attention to:

National News:

State News:

Political News:

To clarify: Virginia congress has suspended consideration of the bill that defines life as beginning at conception. They haven't killed it, they've put it aside for a year. This isn't a victory yet: we can't just forget about this in a year.

Dang. I’ve noticed this is the case for a lot of good news when it comes to laws being shot down or put into affect. It’s always an uphill battle and we have to remain vigilant. 


IMPORTANT: Submit Comments to the Virginia Board of Health

Now that the governor has signed the temporary regulations for women’s health centers, the Virginia Coalition to Protect Women’s Health is looking ahead to the permanent regulatory process. In the permanent regulatory process, the Board of Health will decide which regulations are placed on women’s health centers when the temporary regulations expire. The Department of Health has proposed permanent regulations identical to the temporary regulations. You can learn more about these regulations at the “Learn More” section of our website.

Call on the Board of Health to protect women’s access to reproductive health care and put a stop to the politics at patient expense! The opportunity to submit comment during this phase of the process expires at 11:59 pm on February, 15, 2012.

CLICK HERE to visit the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall website, to submit a comment to the Board of Health.
Here are some suggested talking points to use when contacting the Board of Health:
  • The regulations threaten the continued availability of safe, legal first-trimester abortion and preventive reproductive health care in multiple locations throughout the state. 
  • Extensive, burdensome requirements for clinic buildings that are unrelated to the services health centers provide and have no proven medical benefit will reduce or eliminate patient access to health care.
  • The regulations will increase the financial hurdles to health care for patients, with no proven medical benefit to patients. Women need more access to affordable, high quality health care, not less.
  • If regulations placed on women’s health centers are based upon evidence-based medical practices that advance the public health, then women in the Commonwealth will be able to maintain access to vital health care from trusted medical providers.
  • Medically inappropriate and unnecessarily burdensome regulations would restrict access to essential health care services for the women of Virginia and further marginalize young, low-income, uninsured and minority women by decreasing their health care options.
  • The high standard of care provided by women’s health centers is proven by their impressive safety record. Abortion is one of the safest medical procedures. Overregulation will limit access to a wide range of preventive reproductive health care services provided by women’s health clinics, including life-saving cancer screenings, family planning, and sexually transmitted infection testing and treatment. 
  • It is my hope that the regulations will be amended to be based purely on medicine and science and should not impede women’s access to essential health care.
*Clinic regulations that target abortion providers affect all people capable of getting pregnant, not just women.


Woman’s emotional testimony helps kill abortion bill in Virginia Senate committee


RICHMOND, Va. — After hearing emotionally wrenching testimony Thursday from a woman who terminated her high-risk pregnancy, a Senate committee narrowly rejected legislation that would have banned most abortions after the fetus reaches 20 weeks gestational age.

Republican Sen. Mark Obenshain of Harrisonburg cited the much-debated ability of a fetus to feel pain as justification for banning abortion at that stage unless it is necessary to save the mother’s life or avert the serious risk of an irreversible impairment of a major bodily function.

But Tara Schleifer, 42, of Haymarket told the Education and Health Committee that any pain inflicted by her recent abortion undoubtedly paled in comparison to what her second child would have endured had he been brought into the world with myriad health issues: a heart defect requiring multiple open-heart surgeries, Down Syndrome and a bowel problem that would have required feeding through a tube.

“Learning that our baby would most likely die before he was a year old — and that being after multiple, traumatizing medical interventions — seemed inhumane,” Schleifer said, choking back tears in a crowded but hushed committee meeting room.

“To love your baby and have no way to convey that all of this pain and scary machines were intended to save him was unimaginable,” Schleifer said.

She was 17 weeks pregnant when she received the bad news, she said, and she took a few weeks to research the health issues and consider her options. She ultimately concluded that having the baby would not only subject him to more suffering, but would leave the family financially and emotionally bankrupt and unfairly detract from the parenting of 3-year-old son Isaac.

“Terminating was the last thing I wanted to do, even up until the last moment,” Schleifer said. “I was literally kicking and screaming in the hospital. But I thought of every person in the situation, including my baby, and realized the only ones I could save were the living.”

Schleifer said that without a few weeks to think about her decision — a fate that could befall other women if Obenshain’s bill became law — she would have been further traumatized by second-guessing.

“What if I had aborted in a rush and found out the tests were wrong? I would have been emotionally destroyed and living in perpetual grief,” she said.

“Each family has the right to follow their own conscience in making this most profoundly personal family decision,” she said. “There is no black and white, right and wrong decision. All of it is awful.”

Obenshain’s bill, she said, “is the ultimate in invasive government intrusion into a family’s life.”

The committee also heard from several activists on both sides of the abortion issue. The senators debated the science behind Obenshain’s premise that a fetus feels pain at 20 weeks and whether the legislation is constitutional. But clearly Schleifer’s testimony carried the most weight.

“I don’t feel like I have the ability to make a decision as difficult as the one that young woman made,” said Republican Sen. Harry Blevins of Chesapeake, whose abstention resulted in the GOP-backed bill dying on a 7-7 party-line vote.

Less than 24 hours earlier, Blevins had voted for legislation requiring women seeking an abortion to first get an ultrasound — a measure that abortion-rights supporters say is intended to reduce access to the procedure. But he said he couldn’t vote for Obenshain’s bill after listening to Schleifer.

“I think she had a big impact,” he said.

(Source: stfueverything)


Antigay adoption bill moves on in Virginia

On Wednesday in Virginia, a state senate subcommittee approved a bill that would allow public adoption agencies to refuse to approve adoptions or foster care on “religious or moral grounds” - namely, allowing them to discriminate against LGBT people. 

State Sen. Adam Ebbin (D-Alexandria), who is gay, said that although the words “sexual orientation” or “gay” and “lesbian” are not in Senate Bill 349, lawmakers clearly understand that it’s aimed at justifying the denial of adoptions or foster child placement for gay people.

“This would put into the law that they can be turned away,” Ebbin said. “The issue is simple –whether or not state dollars should be used or taxpayers’ funds should be used to fund discrimination in adoption and foster care.”

At the same time, bills banning job discrimination against state workers and adoption-related discrimination for LGBT people both died in committee this week. Talk about kicking us when we’re down; why so hateful, Virginia? 


Anti-discrimination bill dies in Virginia

A Virginia bill that would have prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation was defeated Monday. A committee in the Republican-dominated Senate rejected the bill 8-7. Republicans defeated a similar bill last year as well.

The kicker? 

Opponents argued that the bill is unneeded because there is no evidence that gays and lesbians face discrimination now.

I’m actually cringing at that explanation. 


Access to safe, legal abortion and even birth control are under attack in Virginia like never before.

[people capable of getting pregnant, not just women]
At at time when Virginians are concerned about jobs, education and transportation, anti-choice politicians in Virignia continue to focus on attacking women’s rights and interfering in their personal reproductive decisions. 
In fact, the first bill prefiled for the 2012 Virginia General Assembly session would ban safe, legal abortion and many forms of birth control in Virginia.
HB 1, patroned by Delegate Bob Marshall, would grant “personhood” status and legal rights to fertilized eggs! If this bill looks familiar, it is because voters in Mississippi recently rejected a similar proposal at the polls. But this hasn’t stopped Virginia’s radical anti-choice politicians from supporting it here.
This bill would redefine “person” in Virginia law and open the door to more government interference in a wide range of personal, private reproductive health care decisions. HB 1 would ban abortion in Virginia in all circumstances including cases of rape, incest and to protect the life and health of a woman. It goes so far that it could even be used at a method to attack access to many common forms of birth control.
"Personhood" is part of a nationwide attack on women’s rights and access to reproductive health care. It’s nothing more than an extreme attempt to ban safe, legal abortion completely and begin a wave of attacks on birth control.
Help NARAL Pro-Choice Virginia stop this dangerous, extreme legislation:


Virginia blocks same-sex couples from adopting

Virginia’s Board of Social Services approved on Wednesday certain measures relating to adoption that will aid in blocking same-sex couples from adopting kids. 

A previous version of the regulations included an anti-discrimination policy that kept adoption agencies from discriminating against potential parents based on sexual orientation, among other factors. But a new version of the policy, which will take effect in May, does not include protection for any characteristics except race, color or national origin.

This means that adoption agencies can legally discriminate against prospective parents based on sexual orientation, age, gender, disability, religion, political belief, and family status. To top it off, the state already bans adoption of children by same-sex couples, but not by gay individuals - this changes that exception.

The Advocate article above points out that more than 1,500 children in Virginia are waiting to be adopted. Why deny children the chance to be adopted by loving, capable parents? Why? 

older posts