Approved doesn't mean available
Jun. 9th, 2006 08:23 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
neadodsMy f-list exploded yesterday with joy that the FDA had approved Gardasil, the vaccine that protects against HPV and therefore against cancer. I would be a great deal more personally joyful if I wasn't so aware that the FDA has also long since approved the pill - which hasn't stopped the growing American Taliban from trying to make sure that just because it's legal doesn't mean it's going to be available to the women who want it.
When we can get Gardasil without a bunch of hysteria about sex and sexuality, THEN I'll rejoice. Because I have yet to see a single article about this vaccine, its testing, its uses, its coverage, etc. without at least one quote from Focus on the Family and its ilk, always beating the drum that abstinence programs - which haven't worked to stop STDs, teen pregnancy, or even abstinence from sexual activity - will magically protect women from cancer. As if that has anything to do with saving women's lives or the many ways in which virtuous girls can become exposed to HPV.
The message being touted here, under all the handwaving about being glad that the vaccine is available just as long as it isn't made mandatory, is simple: Don't make us protect our kids, because we think the little sluts deserve cooter cancer if they don't toe the line. Katha Pollitt states it beautifully in Virginity or Death! It's honor killing on the installment plan... Faced with a choice between sex and death, they choose death every time.
The FDA approval was only the smallest of steps in the right direction. The real battle is not yet begun.
When we can get Gardasil without a bunch of hysteria about sex and sexuality, THEN I'll rejoice. Because I have yet to see a single article about this vaccine, its testing, its uses, its coverage, etc. without at least one quote from Focus on the Family and its ilk, always beating the drum that abstinence programs - which haven't worked to stop STDs, teen pregnancy, or even abstinence from sexual activity - will magically protect women from cancer. As if that has anything to do with saving women's lives or the many ways in which virtuous girls can become exposed to HPV.
The message being touted here, under all the handwaving about being glad that the vaccine is available just as long as it isn't made mandatory, is simple: Don't make us protect our kids, because we think the little sluts deserve cooter cancer if they don't toe the line. Katha Pollitt states it beautifully in Virginity or Death! It's honor killing on the installment plan... Faced with a choice between sex and death, they choose death every time.
The FDA approval was only the smallest of steps in the right direction. The real battle is not yet begun.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: you mean you should never have sex w/your husband?
Date: 2006-06-09 05:06 pm (UTC)All I'm saying is that abstinence works for some of us who choose to follow that lifestyle. I'm not saying that school sex education shuld be abstinence-only, or supporting any other political arm-twisting.
The fact is that when two people practice abstinence prior to entering into a committed, monogamous relationship, they eliminate the possibility of ever contracting a sexually transmitted disease. (Applies equally to gay and lesbian couples and straight couples, by the way.) This is a slice of peace-of-mind that some folks find worth the effort. I'm not saying that everyone should do it. I'm not loony enough to ever expect that to happen. But it is a valid option.
Re: you mean you should never have sex w/your husband?
Date: 2006-06-09 06:12 pm (UTC)I don't have any problem with abstinence. What I do have a problem with is "abstinence-ONLY". I also think that people who rely solely on even freely-chosen abstinence are taking a risk that I personally would find unacceptable -- but different people have different perceptions of risk. I know far too many women who have been raped to be comfortable with the idea that "abstinence will protect me".
Re: you mean you should never have sex w/your husband?
Date: 2006-06-09 06:23 pm (UTC)Re: you mean you should never have sex w/your husband?
Date: 2006-06-09 06:55 pm (UTC)Some of the articles mention vaccinating men as well, but they don't say whether it is this specific formula or a related one.
The makers seem to be trying for herd immunity; vaccinate enough carriers and the viruses will die out. That, unfortunately, won't work unless a big enough "herd" is covered.