Dear George--

During the General Assembly session I wrote to you comparing what was happening in Richmond to the war that was about to be declared by our country against Iraq. I felt that a war against women and children was being waged in the General Assembly.

Well, the war in Iraq has just about ended, but the war against women in the Commonwealth of Virginia rages on.

The most recent skirmish involves the machinations by abortion foes Del. Bob Marshall and the Virginia "Family" Foundation regarding Emergency Contraception and student access to it on the campus of JMU.

If you've read Del. Marshall's letter to the BOV of JMU, you'll notice something peculiar--he doesn't refer to female students in any fashion that acknowledges their humanity. He doesn't use words such as "women," "female students," or even "girls." No--he completed dehumanizes them with the term that was used to put women down when male-only schools first reluctantly began to admit women --"co-eds." Male students were students. Women were not students--they were "co-eds."

I don't think I've ever even heard a living human utter that term. I doubt any of the female students at JMU think of themselves as "co-eds" -- probably many don't even know what the term means. Bob Marshall's attitude towards women is really made clear by his word choice. By not even being able to acknowledge the young women at JMU as human beings, he indicates his lack of respect for these women -- their lives, their hopes, their dreams, their struggles--and their bodies. I daresay that Bob Marshall would like to go back to the days when female students were not welcome on the campuses of Virginia's universities.

And how dare he talk about "responsibility"? What about the young women who have been raped? Have they been "irresponsible"? And what about the male students? (I guess we can call them the "eds.") Where does their responsibility lie? Apparently, it's okay for them not to suffer any consequences for their "irresponsible" behavior. They can go to class, blissfully unaware of any need to go to student health, to pay for two birth control pills (or, now, to get a prescription, find a friend to drive them to the pharmacy, and pay $40 -- no health insurance for birth control in Virginia!) and worry for as many days as it takes before their next period shows up. If they've raped someone, they don't need to worry about suffering the consequences of their criminal behavior--very few cases (almost none!) of on-campus rape are prosecuted in Virginia. They don't need to live with the trauma for the rest of their lives. They don't need to try to make sure they get those two little pills before it's too late, while coping with the aftermath of being violated, and still trying to attend class and keep their grades up.

No, only the women are required to pay the price--whether it's for poor judgement, being sexually assaulted, just making a mistake--or having a failure of a contraceptive method. The male students, according to Bob Marshall, are not part of the equation. (I guess asking the men to help pay for the EC is out of the question...)

Regarding the "Family" Foundation and their pseudo-scientific explanation about why emergency contraception is "abortion," one wants to ask them about all the women whose fertilized eggs never implant--just naturally. What about women whose fertilized eggs implant but fail to divide properly, so that their bodies reject them? What about women who have miscarriages? What are we going to do about them? And what about infertile couples who are so desperate for a child that they subject themselves to the painful procedures, expense, and trouble of in-vitro fertilization, which of necessity includes the development of more fertilized eggs than can be implanted? According to the "Family" Foundation, these people must hate babies, despite all they're doing to try to have one. And, I guess, so do the doctors who are trying to help them.

The "Family" Foundation helpfully points out all the side-effects of taking birth control pills. Never mind that there's almost no risk associated with taking only two pills. If they really cared about women's health risks, they'd be advertising all the risks associated with pregnancy! Pregnancy claims the lives of thousands of women all around the globe each year. The only reason why the US has such a low rate of maternal death is, guess what--the availability of birth control, and the amazing efforts of all the gynecologists and obstetricians who take such wonderful care of women in this country--and who prescribe birth control!

It is time for us to reclaim the moral high ground from these charlatans. To unmask their real agenda. They don't care about babies, about children, about families. They do nothing to help families in their daily struggles. They don't work to ensure that children are happy and safe. They only care about controlling women. If these people cared about human lives, they'd be against the death penalty. They'd be against the war in Iraq. They'd be against returning to the time when desperate women took desperate measures to end a pregnancy--and paid with their lives. They'd take action against men who force their wives to have sex--and get them pregnant. (Bob Marshall has infamously defended the right of men under Virginia law to rape their wives.)

If these people really felt the pain of making the decision to have an abortion, they'd do everything they could to get emergency contraception into the hands of women before they became pregnant, so they wouldn't be faced with this decision. If they cared about children, they'd disband their "Family" Foundation and give all the money they've raised to Prevent Child Abuse Virginia, or to homeless families.

No, their actions speak much more loudly than their words. They care only about making sure women--our lives, our bodies, our sexuality--are under the control of men like Bob Marshall.

A JMU student named Travis White was quoted in the Washington Post making one of the most salient points in the whole debate: "To me, a bunch of old men sitting around a big table shouldn't be able to decide what the health center can do. Or what women can do."

Valerie L'Herrou (electronic mail, April 29, 2003)