Tag Archives: Planned Parenthood

condoms

FYI, Condoms Do Protect You From STDs…

Originally published in the May 30, 2013 issue of the Pacific Union College Campus Chronicle.

condoms

If you think it’s ridiculous, that makes you right. Forty-one percent of PUC students responding to a survey asking whether condoms protect against sexually transmitted diseases and pregnancy in a PUC freshmen-level class this quarter said no.

The fact that so many students in a freshmen-level class held such erroneous notions of reproductive health should not be all that surprising. PUC draws a substantial portion of our student body from small, parochial high schools that sometimes fail to teach their students basic reproductive health care information.

Granted, this is only one freshmen-level class, so this might not necessarily be reflective of the entire PUC population.

But that doesn’t make it any less dangerous. So allow us set the record straight on condoms.

According to an article in The New York Times, “Condoms are 98 percent effective for preventing pregnancy if used from start to finish every time you have sex.”

Heather Boonstra, an official with the Alan Guttmacher Institute, which researches reproductive health issues, agrees. She is quoted telling NBC News that although “they do not provide 100 percent protection for people who are sexually active they are the best and the only method we have for preventing these diseases.”

But everyone wants a second opinion, and what better than an authorative answer to your question texted to you? So we texted “53632,” Planned Parenthood’s free and confidential reproductive health question service, and asked how effective condoms were. Their answer:

“The only method that is able to prevent both pregnancy, HIV and most STDs with high effectiveness is a condom. It can be used for oral, vaginal or anal intercourse. A perfect user is someone that uses a condom every time and correctly, and it is effective in preventing pregnancy 98 percent of the time. With condom use, a typical user is someone who uses a condom some of the time and not always correctly, and it is effective in preventing pregnancy 82 percent of the time.”

So there you go: if you’re not going to stay abstinent, condoms are a fundamental method of protection that you should use. Better yet, they are available for purchase at the College Market or free at Planned Parenthood in Napa.

So be sure to be protected when abstinence fails.

Chloe Robles-Evano contributed to this article.

Anti-Komen, I support Planned Parenthood

Run for the Cure? Not so fast.

Susan G. Komen for the Cure may have abandoned and attempted to wash its hands of its politically motivated decision to cut life-saving funds to Planned Parenthood, but issues brought to light by that debacle have not been solved.

Virulently anti-choice activist, Jane Abraham, continues to sit on their board. As it states on her mini-bio on Komen website, she is “the General Chairman of the Susan B. Anthony List, a not-for-profit membership organization and connected Political Action Committee.” The Susan B. Anthony List’s agenda includes defunding Planned Parenthood, enacting extreme “rape-audit” bills, and rolling back President Obama’s no-cost birth-control policy. The fact that Komen continues to have such an extremist on its board should give pause to any progressive considering participation in the organization.

Throwing pink with “for the cure” on unhealthy products does nothing to help cure breast cancer. There’s a word for this, pinkwashing:

Pinkwasher: (pink’-wah-sher) noun. A company or organization that claims to care about breast cancer by promoting a pink ribbon product, but at the same time produces, manufactures and/or sells products that are linked to the disease.

Komen is the biggest culprit when it comes to pinkwashing. Think pink KFC buckets.

These aren’t the only area where Komen continues to fall short: Komen continues to fund outdated animal tests. As explained by Ingrid Newkirk, president of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, Komen “does women a disservice by continuing to channel funds into animal tests, while other cancer charities have moved on from such old-fashioned abominations or never engaged in them to begin with.” Animals tests are archaic, unethical, ineffective and, quite frankly, useless to modern science. There is no reason for Komen to continue to fund them.

Through its actions regarding Planned Parenthood earlier this year, Komen has inadvertently exposed itself as the right-wing organization hiding behind a “pink ribbon” cover.

Instead of running for the cure, considering making an impact against breast cancer in other, more effective and direct ways. Consider supporting another organization like Planned Parenthood, the American Breast Cancer Foundation, Feel Your Boobies Foundation, and other organizations which fight against breast cancer without ugly right-wing undertones.