Why The Obamacare Decision Is Very Good News For Women. Men now pay women frequent and expensive healthcare expenses. "...much of women’s preventative care, including contraception, Pap test, mammograms, and domestic violence screenings, will be covered without copay."

[–]dontaskdonttells 4 points5 points6 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Darkling5499 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]toptrool 9 points10 points11 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bucketh3ad 14 points15 points16 points 14 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Darkling5499 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]littleelf 13 points14 points15 points 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago* (9 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]littleelf 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]littleelf 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 14 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]littleelf 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

For the record, I completely agree with you about it being ridiculous that vasectomies aren't covered.

women need more preventative care than men

Citation needed.

Biology. Preventative care for women includes preventing pregnancy (which, if nothing else, is horrendously expensive, and has a lot of medical side effects). And if you look at the fact sheet on preventative care, 9 out of the 22 women-specific ones are for pregnant women, not just any women; another five are women-specific diseases (like ovarian cancer screening or HPV, which can't be tested for in men yet), and a bunch more are also available to and covered for all adults (like HIV and STI testing), but especially underlined for women, because they can cause infertility in women (like untreated gonorrhea). And breast cancer, while it can strike males, is very rare--only 1% of breast cancer patients are men, and a study showed it to be .7% of all male cancers, as opposed to 22.9% of all female cancers.

It's just a fact of life that women are, medically, more complex than men, and thus require more preventative care.

[–]littleelf 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]bucketh3ad 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Trotrot 15 points16 points17 points 14 years ago (32 children) | Copy Link

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]starbuxed 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]TerriChris[S] -8 points-7 points-6 points 14 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 14 years ago (27 children) | Copy Link

[–]frasoftw 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -7 points-6 points-5 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan -4 points-3 points-2 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]wavegeek 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]ToraZalinto 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]ToraZalinto 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Darkling5499 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]eb1106 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]Darkling5499 -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–]eb1106 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Darkling5499 -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Nick2632 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]wild-tangent 8 points9 points10 points 14 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]littleelf 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]littleelf 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

But condoms aren't nearly as effective as HBC, and the more effective forms of HBC (when you include human error), like the Ring, the shot, the implant, and also IUDs, are the most expensive ones. So a girl who is poor might choose to take the cheap $5 pill, and end up missing one or two now and again or her antibiotics interfere or she gets sick and barfs it back up one time, and is more likely to get pregnant than a girl who got the shot.

Also, a lot of people are dumb in the heat of the moment. Birth control is a constant, you always have the protection. Not everyone is smart enough to always have condoms on hand, and not everyone will stop for them. Most sexual people I know have had at least one dumb moment where they weren't the safest. Luckily, whereas my friend and I were at risk for STIs by ditching condoms that one dumb time, we were safely on birth control. My other friend had to go out and get his hookup a morning after pill, and hope for the best, when he did it. I would never go without condoms if I weren't, no matter how dumb, but the girl he hooked up with wasn't as worried apparently, and my boyfriend's sister got knocked up because she and her fiance just didn't always use condoms--so, you can't always expect the scare of pregnancy to be enough, either. People are dumb when they're horny.

Making them all the same price would help, but free is even better, because the more women on birth control, the fewer pregnancies. And that means fewer abortions, and fewer babies to poor mothers who end up needing WIC and welfare.

[–]littleelf 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Are we also including human error for OCP's? Like forgetting to take them?

Further, making them all the same price is completely economically moronic. If everything's the same price, there's no incentive to economize at all, which drives up costs.

more women on birth control, the fewer pregnancies. And that means fewer abortions, and fewer babies to poor mothers who end up needing WIC and welfare.

Your premise does not lead to your conclusion. Fewer unwanted pregnancies is a good thing, but none of the policies you suggest would logically lead to that, since women who aren't using condoms aren't (on any grand scale) going to use OCP's, regardless of their price, and the slight increase in effectiveness is not economically worth the huge increase in cost.

Further, teaching people how to use condoms right would likely be cheaper and have the added benefit of preventing STD's, which are much more costly than babies (just counting healthcare costs)

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] -8 points-7 points-6 points 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]wild-tangent 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–]littleelf 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]wild-tangent 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]littleelf 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]wild-tangent 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]littleelf 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]wild-tangent 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Darkling5499 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]fatalisticfatalist 17 points18 points19 points 14 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

[–]altmehere 7 points8 points9 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]racas 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]Darkling5499 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]racas 5 points6 points7 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Ah, well that's a legitimate complaint. I'm not sure condoms should be covered (since you can get them for free at most health departments already), but cancer screenings, and prostate tests should be covered for all men (not just those over 40).

The vasectomy thing is a bit tricky since that's pure birth control. The pill for women is covered under the premise that many women need it for health reasons other than birth control, and that simply doesn't apply to men.

It's a tricky thing, really, but another thing we have to realize is that the Men's Rights Movement is fairly new. While there are plenty of advocates out there, there are still many stigmas that need to be overcome in order for these things to be taken into account. The main one being the "macho man" stigma that makes most men shut up about their legitimate complaints. Yelling and screaming about how women are given more consideration might not be the best way to start out though.

[–]Darkling5499 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]altmehere 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

I fail to see the logic of, "Obamacare is sexist because it also covers female-specific health concerns."

The concern isn't that it also covers female-specific health concerns. It's that it caters to female health concerns rather extensively beyond male concerns even where it doesn't seem necessary, setting up offices to cater to women's health in many government departments (FDA? Really?), among other problems.

I'm not paying for other people's healthcare, I'm paying for my own. Under Obamacare, my monthly payment will likely go down, and the number of procedures that are covered will likely go up. This is a win for me. I'm paying less money for more coverage. If someone else also benefits from this, I really don't give a damn.

That's great for you, but that doesn't mean it's the same for the next man. Or that, even as the cost of coverage itself goes down, your share of the public debt won't go up to cover all of those women-specific departments.

[–]CVTHIZZKID 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It's a complicated issue. Some people would like to see universal health care. Others would like the free market to handle health care, just like most other services. Many politicians pretend to be for one side or the other, but really care about the interests of the big insurance companies.

In my opinion, Obamacare mostly consists of that third option. Obamacare isn't universal health care, it just imposes more regulations on insurance companies. You might think that regulations make the market more fair, but currently a small handful of big companies have a stranglehold on the market, and more regulations make it more difficult for new competitors to enter the game.

I'm a free market supporter, and I think that nationalized health care or government-backed corporate control are both equally wrong. Though I at least appreciate the the supporters of nationalization are honest about their intentions, and though we strongly disagree, helping people is their primary intention. Many far leftists hate Obamacare as much or more than the free market supporters, rightfully believing it represents corporate interests.

The issue with men's rights isn't the primary debate, but it's tangentially related. I was not aware of this until today, but it looks as if the law does give unequal preference to women over men. For example, the law creates several new offices for women's health without corresponding ones for men's health. It outlaws insurance plans charging more for women, even though auto and life insurance charge men more, and nobody cries sexism about that.

MRAs can agree that Obamacare is sexist, but not much else. Some think the new law would be ok if the sexist portions were removed. Some won't be satisfied until there is universal health care. The free marketers want government to step out entirely. Because MR doesn't have a political consensus, it's difficult to work together on issues like these.

[–]UtilitarianByNature 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]UtilitarianByNature 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]duglock 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]fatalisticfatalist 6 points7 points8 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]toptrool 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (42 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 14 years ago (40 children) | Copy Link

[–]toptrool 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (37 children) | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You might not be able to make a shitload of money of male birth control but considering the side-effects female birth control can have it would be a good way to raise the quality of life (thus you would probably get funding under a single payer system).

There is certainly a 'shitload' of money to be made in the world of 'male birth control'. If feminists weren't busy trying to limit the funds/research for this and, instead, give free handouts to women on men's tax dollars we'd live in a FAR happier and 'equal' society.

Those are not free handouts, those are things that raise the quality of life and the health of woman.

So, if it increases the quality of life and the health of women it's not a free handout, but if it does the same for men it is? You do know that this money comes from SOMEWHERE, right? Taking money AWAY from men for non-medical things such as birth control IS NEGATIVELY affecting the life of men. Instead of this money being (rightfully) given to HELP IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR MEN, it's given to give women FREE handouts rather than even give men an equal playing field. We deserve birth control as much as women do (especially since Western women have every single reproductive right and men have NONE), and our money should be spent on helping research it.

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]AryoBarzan 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]littleelf 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]MockingDead -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]toptrool -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]toptrool 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]toptrool 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If that's true can you back it up with statistics or research?

I can:

Here are mine:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_total_health_expenditure_(PPP)_per_capita
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy (a very crude indicator, nonetheless the best I have without getting to technical)

Academic research on this topic:

Take a good look at the administrative costs cited in those papers, the administrative costs are through the roof in America and are a big part of the reason why single payer is so much cheaper.

The only model that I would prefer to my country's model is the Singapore model.

[–]toptrool 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

[–]hardwarequestions 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]hardwarequestions 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]toptrool -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting -2 points-1 points0 points 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]toptrool 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting -3 points-2 points-1 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]toptrool 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–]toptrool 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]skepticalmom 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Darkling5499 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]betaprime 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]AnInfiniteAmount -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Faryshta -1 points0 points1 point 14 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Darkling5499 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]Faryshta 1 point2 points3 points 14 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]Darkling5499 0 points1 point2 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]sixofthebest 2 points3 points4 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]AnthonyZarat[🍰] -7 points-6 points-5 points 14 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]InfinitelyThirsting 3 points4 points5 points 14 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh my god, it does not. You are so factually incorrect with these posts, it's horrendous. The prostate PSA test is highly flawed and treatments often have long-term deleterious effects. It has an 80% false positive rate, and:

More than half of cancers detected with PSA screening are localized (confined to the prostate), not aggressive at diagnosis, and unlikely to become life-threatening. However, 90 percent of patients receive immediate treatment for prostate cancer, such as surgery or radiation therapy. In many patients, these treatments have substantial short- and long-term side effects without any clinical benefit.

It's not just about money, it's also about men who are needlessly suffering from incontinence, ED, or chemo effects, for no good reason.

For the rest of your points you raise--there is no equivalent for birth control for men. Now that HPV vaccines are being recommended for boys, they'll have to be covered as well. Smoking cessation treatment is covered for EVERYONE, not just women. The only unfair things are that vasectomies aren't covered, and that DV counseling is only for women.

Source.

Oh, and hey look at this thing that's covered for men only:

Abdominal Aortic Aneurysm: one-time screening for men of specified ages who have ever smoked

Comments