Amendment One

When I opened my eyes Wednesday morning of last week, I was relived to be waking up a resident of New York State. Why, you ask? Tuesday night, North Carolina passed Amendment One, an amendment that defines marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Although North Carolina was a state which already held a law banning gay marriage, Amendment One securely slams the door on the issue, going one step further in including a ban on same-sex civil unions.

However, members of the LGBT community are not the only ones who should be saddened by this decision; the “marriage-plus” amendment could potentially affect straight couples in civil union. Jeremy Kennedy, campaign manager for Protect All NC Families, a campaign against Amendment One, is concerned about the future of health benefits for domestic partners, gay or straight. There is also the fear that Amendment One could disrupt protection orders for unmarried couples, making it difficult to file for domestic abuse cases if a person is living with their significant other.

Amendment One is clearly a discriminatory act, which not only threatens the relationship status of the LGBT community, but also the security of quality health care and human rights for all. I encourage all people in favor of equal marriage laws, as well as those in favor of basic human rights, to stand up for what you believe in. There are many who hold reservations as to how long the amendment will survive, and for good reason. We are the future of the United States, and only our generation, young and informed, can stand against inexcusable amendments like Amendment One if we let our voices be heard.

Today, I am not only proud to live in a state which allows marriage equality, but am proud to be involved with an organization like Planned Parenthood. I know that if Amendment One does affect access to health care benefits for those in the LGBT community, Planned Parenthood will be there to offer quality health care for those who need it. With the help of others, especially those of my own generation, I hope to someday be proud to wake up in a place where love is not restricted or defined.

Elise
Marketing Intern, PPRSR

Image via www.hrc.org.

Newest accessory: Condom holders aren't just for convenience.

Condoms? Yes please. A cute, incognito way to stash my condoms…but still have them within reach? Yes again.

Lets be honest, girls will find any excuse to buy cute accessories, whether it’s for their outfits, apartments, or their condoms. Though it could be used as a shopping excuse, the practicality of the array of new, fun condom holders on sale is reason enough to buy. Not many want to display their array of condom choices in public view, but stashing them at the bottom of your drawer, or losing them in that giant “purse” you carry around is just not convenient. Well ladies (and gents) those days of fumbling blindly in your drawer or purse are gone!

There are now a ton of options and ways to store your protection. The Frisky has a great article showcasing different options for condom holders. There are clean, sleek condom dispensers that hold a significant amount and are perfect for a guy’s nightstand, so they are always within reach. If you’re main concern isn’t just convenience but instead want something a little more disguised and stylish, there are several vase-like options. The newest trend seems to be sleek cases meant to hold one or two condoms and stored in your purse. Many look just like a stylish compact. I even discovered a cool website where you can design your own!


Basically, your options are endless when it comes to storing your condoms. Whether you’re looking for an industrial-sized dispenser or a sleek, fashionable holder for your purse, there’s a condom holder out there for you…so get shopping!

p.s. if you’re not in the market for a holder but still want some cute protection, check out the different lines of Proper Attire condoms.

How do you love it?

I wanted to post this early so that you could have enough time to plan your celebration! October 21st is Love Your Body Day and, yes, it seems sad that in our busy lives we must set aside a day to be conscious of loving your body, but it's so hard to LOVE YOUR BODY when often all you see in ads are incredibly hard to attain bodies. So, on Wednesday, take a moment with yourself or with your friends to ruminate on your curvy hips, your yummy legs, lovely tummy or that scar you got from falling off your bike when you were chasing the neighborhood boys down the street.

Leave a comment and let us know how you are celebrating!

Just How Much Should Love Hurt? Or, Don't Claim Your Orgasm, Ladies.

Just how much should love hurt? According to Christina Nehring, a lot. And you won't just hurt, you'll suffer. But oh will it be worth it.

In fact, you can expect to feel miserable, alone, on the edge of insanity... all for the plight of love and romance.

And sex? What sex? Nehring argues that the "availiablity" of sex in our age of internet technologies and mass mediated communications makes true love impossible; that romance depends on "other-ness, tension, and reserve." Well, I guess Nehring and I have different definitions of love and romance. It's difficult for me to imagine any deep feelings of companionship and compassion to come out of that blockade that she thinks must be built between partners.

Nehring uses the romance stories of centuries past as her models - Jane Austen, in particular. As a book nerd, I can even somewhat understand Nehring's sense of Romanticism and idealism towards love and romance, but I don't understand why this tortuous angst is required. Yes, love when it is towards an unwilling object, love when it is unreciprocated, is taxing on our emotions and bodies. But those are situations where the rational and self-respecting thing to do is walk away.

Out of all the things that Nehring says about the disintegration of love in our time, the most problematic to me are her sex-negative and even female body-negative opinions, paraphrased in an article by Laura Sessions Step for sexreally.com:

"It is not, for example, 'sex-on-tap,' or 'the relentless emphasis on sexual climax that…has a largely depleting effect on the life of the emotions.' 'When erotic intimacy is available at the tap of a mouse,' she writes, or, indeed, at the amiable request of one’s household partner (“what about a quickie before lunch, dear?”); when magazines nudge us to 'claim' orgasms as we do receipts at the end of our transactions at Starbucks; when Broadway hits like Eve Ensler’s The Vagina Monologues have women hollering the names of their genitals and baking cakes in their shape, then sex has simply become too available.”

Wait... what? Since when does it make sense to link a woman's positive sense of self and body image with bad types of love? And, last time I checked, the Vagina Monologues have been nothing but positive for women all over the globe for over 10 years.

Sessions Stepp goes on, saying:

"Love is also not an equal partnership, in her view. It is the ardor of a college student for her professor, a young man for an older man."

This view on love is troubling. It means that we would be denied real human connection, openness, and comfort. It also would mean elevated levels of depression, partner abuse, and so on. I, for one, do not think that love means despair.

An interesting and maybe even enlightening or liberating exercise that I suggest all our readers do is to take a moment and think about what sex, love and romance mean to you. How do you define them? Do they involve two people? Can't they involve just you? Perhaps they involve more? I urge you to rethink those three vague ideas outside of their social constructions (p.s. this originally was an exercise in Dr. Sekile Nzinga Johnson's Psych of Women class in spring 2009, so I can't take all the credit for it!).