Archetype in Action Organization
Today a friend of mine shared a website that lists fifty-one "Christian Friendly" euphemisms for the word "vagina". I guess the anatomical name is not "friendly" enough for some people. In fact the website "Christwire.org" deems the word "vagina" as "vulgar" and has supplied a list of words they prefer their commenter to use. This occurs on the same day the VAWA legislation (“Violence Against Women Act” H.R. 4970, originally enacted in 1994) is being tossed around our Nation's Capital.
The problem with both is that too much fear is charging the atmosphere around discussions concerning women. Most of these "discussions" do not include women. I am getting very radical here because to me it would be a logical decision to include the actual owners of vaginas and fallopian tubes when deciding what women need in reproductive health matters It seems to me that because I have been pregnant and carried two children into this world... wouldn't I have some information that would be beneficial in the determination of my "legal rights" of owning a vagina and uterus? Don’t I have the right, as a citizen, to add to the current legislative conversation over the medical care I specifically need regarding my reproductive care?
Even if I never gave birth: As a woman I demand a place at the table and when seated to be included in discussion as an adult and with respect. It is insanity that I even have to write those words but we all saw what happened to Sandra Fluke and I am willing to bet she did not know she needed to begin her Congressional statement with a reminder that she deserves respect when discussing HER body.
We all saw on television the Congressional "panels" of men discuss women’s reproductive rights. Men from every religion were present. When the cry to have an actual woman contribute factual and actual working knowledge of a vagina and the significance of choosing when she can have a family and control the size of her family, better yet simply speak to medically controlling her own body, as a right of health care, she was met with outrageous name calling and attacked for being a "slut".
There is a "War on Women" and it is very clear that Republicans have chosen vaginas , oops I mean wizard sleeves, as one of their favorite and most important targets.
I refuse to call my vagina "Canker Sleeve" or a "Baby Door". And what is worse is that H.R. 4970 removes protection from Native Americans, immigrants, and gay/bisexual/lesbian and transgendered women from receiving treatment and protections.
Yes ...the two are related. Because until women are discussed with respect and honor, that includes our anatomy, with protections previously approved by our government, in our legislative bodies discussing our physical bodies, we are not being treated with the dignity we deserve.
Because the religious "right" has inserted itself into our government, and has been forcing its dogma into our legislation, I would not be surprised if the list of vagina euphemisms was indeed used in their offices.
I am curious...Is there a "Christian Friendly" word for rape?
I have previously shared the startling statistics on rape. Yet to be clear and highlight the seriousness of this current legislative discussion around H.R. 4970, which is determined to reduce our legal protections; I will revisit them.
1 out of 4 women will be sexually assaulted or raped over her lifetime.
1 out of 6 men will face the same.
Approximately, ONLY 1 in 10 assaults/rapes will be reported to authorities.
Republicans wish to strip certain segments of our population, mainly women, of their right to receive care and treatment. The issue is simply stated :
The House GOP bill is stripping expanded protections included in the Senate-passed version, which extends coverage to gay, bisexual, and transgender victims of domestic abuse.
"For instance, H.R. 4970 fails to provide for concurrent special domestic-violence criminal jurisdiction by tribal authorities over non-Indians, and omits clarification of tribal courts' full civil jurisdiction regarding certain protection orders over non-Indians,"
"The bill also fails to include language that would prohibit discrimination against LGBT victims in VAWA grant programs. No sexual-assault or domestic-violence victim should be beaten, hurt, or killed because they could not access needed support, assistance, and protection." the White House said in a statement.
In this rush to undo "regulations" that are “hampering the economic success of our country”: this is the best our elected officials can do with their time?
The National Task Force to End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women states:
“We are devastated that provisions that will endanger vulnerable immigrant victims passed in the House today. For the first time in nearly 20 years, this bill would weaken crucial protections in VAWA for battered immigrants, putting them at risk of retaliation by their abusers and undermining law enforcement and public safety" - Grace Huang, Public Policy Director of the Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence."
“Native women aren’t safer as a result of the passage of H.R. 4970. In fact, the tribal provisions included in this bill create additional hurdles for Indian women seeking protection from violence on tribal lands, and that is unacceptable” - Juana Majel-Dixon, 1st Vice President of the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) and co-chair of the NCAI Task Force on Violence Against Women.
The adopted House bill ignores the needs of vulnerable communities, rolls back years of progress aimed at protecting victim safety, weakens provisions in the Senate bill to protect victims in public housing and on college campuses, and strips the rights of community stakeholders to give input on VAWA programs. The bill has been soundly rejected as dangerous to victims by more than 325 diverse organizations and leaders representing millions of constituents throughout the country."
The Raw Story reports:
Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT), who introduced the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act to the Senate, said Wednesday he was disappointed in House Republicans.
The House voted 222-205 to pass the Republican version of reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act. Unlike the Senate version, which passed in April, the House bill omits provisions related to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgendered, immigrant and Native women and men.
“I am disappointed that the House Republican leadership refused to consider the bipartisan Senate bill and insisted on ramming through an ill-conceived measure that would leave victims unprotected,” Leahy said. “I am encouraged by those members of the House, Democrats and Republicans, who stood with the victims and rejected the destructive approach to roll back protections for victims of violence.”
If this current Republican War on Women continues we will see "Flesh Wraps" and "Sin Flowers" lose protections they have received the past two decades.
I know and understand, we as women are more then a vagina, yet it is appearing as if our government does not comprehend this fact. Hell, we are not even worthy of legal protection or worthy of emergency services if we are violated by sexual assault. We are walking, brain dead beasts with "vulgar" vaginas and white Republican men know what is best for us and our "Satan's Traps".
This argument is clear to me: I am not a full human being deserving of current protective legislation. I have been reduced to euphemisms and if I was gay, or a bisexual Native American, worse yet, a lesbian and an immigrant, my "Man's Gift" would not be worthy of protection. And what ever horror befell me... It would be my fault for owning a "Blood Sewer", because those terms are less offensive then "vagina". Republicans know what is best for me and my "Pink Velveeta Shell".
* ChristWire.org is a parody website. I include them because there are followers who do take them as a serious Religious website and they have been cited in many articles. This list of words does highlight issues women are facing in today's political climate and makes a very valid point of how we, women, are degraded through anatomical descriptions religious groups and politicians use when discussing women in the third person, as if we were invisible.