Poor, pitiful law student. Sandra Fluke can somehow afford to attend Georgetown Law School, but can’t afford to pay for her own contraception. She wants you to take care of that for her, thankyouverymuch, whether you want to or not.
Speaking at a hearing held by Pelosi to tout Pres. Obama’s mandate that virtually every health insurance plan cover the full cost of contraception and abortion-inducing products, Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke said that it’s too expensive to have sex in law school without mandated insurance coverage.
Apparently, four out of every ten co-eds are having so much sex that it’s hard to make ends meet if they have to pay for their own contraception, Fluke’s research shows.
“Forty percent of the female students at Georgetown Law reported to us that they struggled financially as a result of this policy (Georgetown student insurance not covering contraception), Fluke reported.
It costs a female student $3,000 to have protected sex over the course of her three-year stint in law school, according to her calculations.
“Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school,” Fluke told the hearing.
Georgetown University Law School is not cheap. It costs more than $70,000 per year without scholarships or other financial aid. Miss Fluke would have us believe that someone who can afford to attend Georgetown can not afford to pay for his or her own lifestyle.
Fluke claims they can’t afford to pay to, as the president so eloquently phrased it, avoid being punished with a baby before they graduate into extremely lucrative careers, in Fluke’s case most likely in a future Democratic administration.
The math derived from Fluke’s $3,000 price tag suggests that Georgetown is one swingin’ Catholic campus.
At a dollar a condom if she shops at CVS pharmacy’s website, that $3,000 would buy her 3,000 condoms – or, 1,000 a year. (By the way, why does CVS.com list the weight of its condom products in terms of pounds?)
Assuming it’s not a leap year, that’s 1,000 divided by 365 – or having sex 2.74 times a day, every day, for three straight years. And, I thought Georgetown was a Catholic university where women might be prone to shun casual, unmarried sex. At least its health insurance doesn’t cover contraception (that which you subsidize, you get more of, you know).
And, that’s not even considering that there are Planned Parenthood clinics in her neighborhood that give condoms away and sell them at a discount, which could help make her sexual zeal more economical.
With all due respect, Miss Fluke, your evidently very active amorous life is your business and should remain that way. It isn’t worth wrecking the Constitution.
More: So this is what we’ve come to in the age of sexual liberation: Law students you’d take to Congress but wouldn’t take home to meet Mom. We’re told to keep the rosaries off the liberated’s ovaries, but don’t let the beliefs behind the rosaries get in the way of taxpayer funded boom-boom. We’re told to keep the government out of our bedrooms, until we want the government to pay for what we’re doing in the bedroom. Then, bring Uncle Sam right on in to pick up the tab, and have all the fun you want. Today’s empowered, independent woman can go to law school but can’t manage her finances well enough to spring for the pill.
This is what the 60s sexual liberation has brought us to.
More: Doing a bit more fact-checking of Pelosi’s protege. The pill can be had from Wal-Mart for about $9 a month, or $108 per year. Anyone with a smartphone is paying far more than that annual pill cost for one month of their precious iPhone. And if Miss Fluke could tear herself away from answering “How you doin?” in the affirmative for a few hours, she could get her tubes actually tied off for between $1000 and $3000.
Either this Georgetown law student is too dumb to shop around to reduce her lifestyle costs, or she’s using abortion as birth control, or she’s just lying about this whole thing. If it’s the latter, Congress might suddenly find her testimony a whole lot more interesting.
Are Georgetown U and George Washington U the same institution?
Typos and my own goofiness, fixed.
No.
No, but both are fine institutions, especially if you endeavor to pick up female law students. As a bonus, THEY pick up the check!!!
If it costs $3,000.00 per female student to have protected sex maybe they should consider a new profession. I know the costs of materials and contraception have gone up, but one has to wonder how do they have time to study? This is such crap that I had to laugh at the premise of this young womans argument for insurance coverage. If you are a young woman and you need to have that much sex there are indeed other professions much more lucrative to embark on than going for a college education that may or may not put you into employment. Just ask Elliot Spitzer how much sex cost him in a given year. Hell, I am married and do not have that much sex and consider my sex life pretty damn good. Now there is another way to have free unprotected sex, settle down and get married…
[Insert inappropriate lawyer = oldest profession joke here]
First it was no fault free abortions. Then it was free needles for hypes. Now it’s free Trojans and French Ticklers for nymphs. I guess free General Electric vibrators are next. Better living with electricity. Since anything goes, why do we have lawyers?
I watched an old X Files episode the other day and in it a “Fluke” was a nasty tape worm that once inside a human being fed off that person until that person died and then went off to find another host.
So lesson learned: all Georgetown women should be avoided like the plague that they are if Ms Fluke is any example.
No, they are not the same school. These poor students go to Georgetown Law if they can’t get into, you know, Harvard or something.
Wow, 3 condoms a day? Forget having time to study, when do they have time to eat or sleep?
She sounds like someone who had always had someone else pay for everything. I’d like to ask her just one question: how many servants did you have growing up? If the number is anything over zero, then she has no room to tell me to open my wallet for anything.
“Wow, 3 condoms a day? Forget having time to study, when do they have time to eat or sleep?”
No, no, no! You don’t get it. GWU students are so vigorous they need to use 3 at a time. Call it the Tiger Woods method (in case you get a hole in one…).
A perfect reply. Unless she is preparing to be a professional hooker, she should spend her time reading and studying.
This is called “the cost of the pill” give me a break. You can’t really expect women are complaining about the cost of anything else. You are either a complete moron or some one who can not “get any”
Hmmm. Georgetown University must not offer much in the way of mathematics.
Birth control pills cost about $4.00 per month, assuming you’re shopping at Walmart. So for three years that would be $144.00 for three years.
Now lets consider condoms. A 36 count of condoms, from the same Walmart is $10.00. From the $3,000 that is claimed to be the cost of contraception for three years, minus the $144 for birth control pills you’re left with $2,866 for rubbers. You would be able to buy approximately 286 packs of rubbers containing 36 individual ones in which to sheath your John Thomas some 10,296 times. Now there are 365 days a year so having access to that amount of latex, would allow you to dip your wick some 28 times a day.
All I’m saying is that’s a lot of pipe to be laying.
Or logic, for that matter.
I am sure that Ms. Fluke thinks that her argument was absolutely devastating, and that there was no way anyone could possibly refute it.
The “benefits” of a college education, I guess.
Walmart? Walmart?!?!? You don’t really expect a GTU student who’s diddling every guy on campus to lower herself to going to Walmart do you? Eww.
If she was good at math, she’d be in an engineering school learning to actually produce something.
Vice being in law school where you learn to get rich by figuring out reasons to take away other people’s money.
Where on earth do you get that BCPs cost $4.00/mo for uninsured? The brand I am personally familiar with are $60.00/mo. retail, plus for safe sex condoms are required in addition! And to get that yearly prescription for BCPs renewed, there must be check-up with Doc, at $200 a visit (if not insured).
“With all due respect, Miss Fluke, your evidently very active amorous life is your business and should remain that way. It isn’t worth wrecking the Constitution.”
By all means! Second the motion!
Beyond that if Madam Fluke and friends are bent on playing, they need to find a way (other than from our pockets) to pay. What’s all that education good for anyway?
I’m not getting much sex these days. Can I get a student loan to attend Georgetown?
“comment of the thread” award.
(I’m married and testosterone-challenged. Otherwise I’d try to compete with BoB S.)
I think what Ms. Fluke really wants is “choice,” specifically, the choice to use thousand-dollar-a-year birth control pills rather than dollar-a-shot rubbers. Who knows – maybe she’s allergic to latex.
The safest way to have sex, is to use BOTH kinds of Birth Control – BCPs or an IUD or Patch AND condoms.
Forget about the fact that this poor sad girl has so little shame that she’s happy to parade her cheap morals in front of the entire nation. Forget about the fact that this poor sad girl is now going to be propositioned by every partner in every firm she ever works at from now ’til kingdom come.
On what day did that dingbat, Nancy Pelosi, think that trotting out some spoiled bimbo to whine about the cost of her sex life would help the general liberal argument that all this nonsense about contraception is really about poor women and families, blahblahblah…? Really? This was her go-to girl for “testimony” that the cost of contraception is SO much more important than pre-natal care, or children’s health care, or cancer care that it must be mandated as cost-free? Seriously?
Geez. Maybe what she really ought to be pushing is mandated free Alzheimer’s testing for all…and she can be first in line…just sayin’.
It’s not so hard to understand Pelosi’s desire to help out the contraceptive/abortion industry if one just follows the money.
As of the time I wrote that post, Planned Parenthood was the #1 donor to Pelosi’s re-election fund.
QED.
orget about the fact that this poor sad girl is now going to be propositioned by every partner in every firm she ever works at
And every time that happens, that “poor sad girl” can cash in on five- or six-figure “sexual harassment” settlements.
She’ll probably end up in a federal bureaucratic agency, making insane amounts of money for very little useful work.
Let’s see $3000 in three years. Here is my advice. Since you are going to be a lawyer anyway may I suggest that you follow your natural instincts and get a photo spread and a website. At a modest $300 per hour you could have 5 two hour “dates” a week and earn $156,000 per year tax free. You could then buy all the contraceptives you want and pay for law school. There — problem solve
I recommend she try oral contraception. It’s easy, convenient and free.
Just say No.
Dirty mind that I have, I thought you meant something else completely. Which would also work and not cost a dime.
A bottle of aspirin doean’t cost very much either…
What do you expect her to do, hold an aspirin between her knees as a form of contraception?
No wonder there’s such clamor for Tart Reform!!
HeHe
How did I know you were gonna come up with something like that, Henry?
Because I never fail to disappoint.
“It costs a female student $3,000 to have protected sex over the course of her three-year stint in law school”
We’ve established what they are, now we’re haggling over the price.
It’s her fault for going out with destitute guys and, most likely, girls. I know that modern morals have changed but a good rule of thumb for a girl would be ” If a guy cannot afford a new condom you don’t sleep with him.”!
Turning down a “partner” who doesn’t respect her enough to wrap it would be too much like self-respect.
I did a little research and the most any birth control pills cost anywhere are $50 a month. Multiply that by 36 and it’s $1800.
So, I wonder if this young woman is maybe using something like abortion for birth control? That would be a lot more expensive.
If I was her mother, I’d be so embarrassed.
Actually the highest-priced pills, which we peri-menopausal women use more for hormone-replacement therapy than for birth control, do cost $80/month.
– has been changed to “Hoya Sexa!”? Appropriate to this article, its official motto translates from the Latin as “Both into One”.
I assume that many G’town students still live off campus in nearby high-end Glover and Cleveland Parks, sharing townhouses, typically three-four to a townhouse. This is almost certainly true of law students more than undergrads. Otherwise they live in nice neighborhoods in Alexandria and Arlington.
So they live well, whether on or off campus, have the scratch from somewhere for tuition (even if it’s from loans, it’s from “somewhere”). If they have to get their own contraception, how many lattes at Starbucks do they have to give up? Two a week on average? They can also give up one or two of the multiple nights a week of drinking many of them do. You know when the weekend starts for a lot of DC-area young professionals and grad students? Try Wednesday. Try getting into a tony bar in G’town on a weeknight after work, and find the place packed.
Does anyone remember when most students were literally poor? I do. That must have ended at least a couple of decades ago.
You do not expect then to use just any off-the-shelf condoms do you? Nor would they go to a clinic. They have to go to their family’s well-connected doctor. /s
Seriously, are condoms covered by insurance policies, now? And why is the chick buying the condoms? And I guess in their calculations, they factored in the cost of all their mechanical devices and the batteries to run them?
Actual birth-control is fairly cheap. While you are getting your yearly exam, get your script. The pills are about $50/year.
Math is hard. Truth, it seems, is even harder.
This is a knee-jerk reaction to “those evil Republicans are going to take away your ladyparts”. it doesn’t have to be true. It just has to hit them where they live. I’ve decided that The Rapture cannot get here soon enough.
Bryan – This sounds like a Nancy Pelosi sob story with a college student who is just lying through her teeth. I just saw this on the Weekly Standard: http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/dc-target-sells-birth-control-9-month-georgetown-student-tells-congress-friends-are-going-broke-pay-pills_632955.html
i should have gone to college there, wow, just wow!
its good to know so many coeds are having trouble affording birth control.
i can help. spring break, here i come. (oops, sorry, pi).
btw, i heard about all you have to do to get college paid for by uncle $ugar these demorat day$ is to be a poor unwed mother. something about some states (maine?) even paying for new cars to get to school? wouldn’t doubt it.
Many women get the man to pay for the abortion whether they’re pregnant or not. If they can’t afford pills, they should get the lucky swain to pay for them.
Maaaaaaaaaaan, the line to her dorm or apartment or townhouse must be HUGE! She will make a great lawyer though….already screwing at least 2-3 people a day.
So it now takes 6 years of “higher” education to become a liar or professional victim. If Obama is re-elected I am sure she will go right into the Justice Department as some sort of victims advocate.
so in other words…these women should be in the yellow pages….under…public utilities…….
these women should be in the YELLOW PAGES…under…PUBLIC UTILITIES
theresa – I think you misspelled the word before “Utilities.” You put an L in it – You need to take out the L.
Oh Brother! I almost fell out of my chair laughing at these comments. My sides will hurt for a week!
Ms. Fluke doesn’t HAVE to go to Georgetown. She is free to go to a non-Catholic college where Student Health will supply her with birth control pills, condoms, and the morning-after pill. All free of charge. Can’t afford to pay for her own contraceptives? Piffle! Cut out the mani-pedi appointments and you’ll have plenty of money to support your sex life.
– The Paper Chase, stop thinking about sex and study, you can get laid all you want after law school.
– pretty much exhausts the subject.
Mr. Preston:
It’s not so much I disagree w/what you’re saying; however, I can’t hear what you’re saying b/c of the way you’re saying it. I’m SO tired of ad hominem, non sequitur, etc. attacks, albeit mostly from the left — but it’s no more appealing from the conservative side (which I mostly appreciate). While you’re certainly entitled to your opinion, can it be stated in such a way to avoid the slick snark?
Pls, “just the facts”. Thanks.
I know her personally. She has been in a monogamous relationship for 8 years and is engaged. She was just arguing for her friends who have literally lost ovaries and had seizures b/c they’re unable to get birth control for their medical problems.
Ok, I’ll go ahead and be blunt now that an appeal to sympathy has been raised.
I was unaware that being on a birth control pill would prevent the spontaneous loss of ovaries and prevent spontaneous seizures.
On the other hand, there ARE sexually transmitted diseases that WILL cause these effects – and being on the pill won’t prevent the transmission of said afflictions. Even a tubal pregnancy can inflict damage to ovaries – but it still has to be preceeded by the decision to engage in sexual activity in the first place.
Rubbers are a better option if one is engaging in that sort of activity – and they certainly don’t cost as much per year as she is quoting!
Keeping their legs together – or even being at least a little bit selective in who one hops into the sack with – is an even better option if one wishes to minimize the chances of contracting such unpleasantness….
I, along with the rest of the population, should not have to pay for such personal decisions.
Besides, isn’t it the far left who are always telling the rest of us to stay out of their bedroom?
No offense, but why should we believe the unsupported assertions of a truly anonymous commenter?
Hmmm, she argued specifically from a Georgetown law student perspective, so one has to assume these friends are also Georgetown law students. In which case, the same arguments apply: if they can afford Georgetown, they can afford the pill. And if the pill is being prescribed for serious medical reasons, and they can show they cannot afford to pay for them, there are other avenues they can pursue to have their meds covered. Also, she specifically argued this from a birth control perspective, not a medical condition perspective.
So basically, I’m callin’ BS.
But they can find money for other things. Please spare us the b.s
Why does she need birth control for gay sex?
This is one of the dumbest, most offensive posts I’ve read in a while–congrats for that! First of all, stop treating this woman like she’s tattooed with a scarlet letter. Fun fact: ladies who are in relationships tend to spend more money on birth control, since they’re more likely to be having regular sex. In any event, a woman who uses contraception is taking responsibility for her sexual actions. More contraception, less abortions. Second, who uses condoms anymore? When we’re talking about ladies spending money on contraception, we’re certainly not talking about trojans. We’re talking about prescription birth control, which runs around $30/month, not nine. Find a woman and ask her, if you can. Third, conservatives need to get off the anti-sex train—or get off, period. What ninnies you conservative men are!
“conservativelady”….yeah right….anyway, I don’t think anyone here is on an “anti-sex train” so much as they are on an ‘anti-havingtopayforsomeoneelsespoordecisions train’.
As for the pill vs the rubber – the pill will NOT protect against STD’s, but the rubber will. Wasn’t this woman’s point all about health effects?
As for who uses a rubber these days, my assumption is quite a few as the condom industry has so far not asked for a government bailout, so I assume they are doing just fine, financially speaking.
How do you misconstrue the concept of “pay for it yourself” into “anti-sex”? Unless you’re being intentionally obtuse.
Whats next? Subsidized movies and popcorn? Look if she want to engage in recreational sex, fine. But like any other form of recreation she ought to pay for it herself or get her lovers to pay for it.
Anti-sex? Not at all, just don’t whine about having others pay for her to play. If she wants to be a just an impulse driven sex object vice a thinking rational person, good for her. That’s what contraceptives and abortions are all about -turning women from respected partners and mothers into simply sex toys willing to destroy life for the convenience of men.
And since they’re turning themselves into toys for boys, the government shouldn’t be picking up the tab, the boys utilizing her should.
You want to see dumb look in the mirror – nobody except for her cares about her sex life – she wants birth control she can pay for it – nobody uses skins – maybe that’s responsible for the STD epidemic? Try real hard not to be so stupid.
Lesbians save $1000 a year? That is the answer!
Conspicuously absent from this discussion are the guys that these women are supposedly having sex with. (Although, I do realize that as far as liberals are concerned the only use for men is sperm donation and child support.) Just what do the guys think about all this anyway?
Most of these women are so hateful I have always wondered who would even want to have sex with them.
Sandra Fluke has made remember an old joke: “What do female attorneys use for birth control?” Their personalities!!
Wow, I’ve haven’t felt this offended since middle school… so much of this article that we are all commenting on is both misogynistic and incorrect; nearly all of it, in fact.
There are many reasons a woman might be taking birth-control medication that actually has nothing to do with not getting pregnant, but with other medical conditions and insurance will not cover those costs for her; not even with these extenuating circumstances and that is not fair. If it were the other way around, if it were MEN who weren’t being covered, this wouldn’t even be an issue. But here we are, “the girls” have to speak up and fight for ourselves. Get your heads out of your asses and actually pay attention to the facts, not the misogynistic drivel of the uninformed.
Autumn – please refer back to the last sentence from ‘Chuck’
The Clintons established the principle that liberals are a species without shame…and that liberal bastion Georgetown reminds us of the enduring nature of that principle
Wow, Autumn! You sure skilled at being offended. And at proclaiming victimhood. When it comes to logic, though …. oh forget it; logic is such a waste of time.
No one is discussing that if one of these female law students would get pregnant that taxpayers would spend 30,000 in maternity costs, healthcare for the child, housing, and food stamps. Paying to provide women the opportunity to practice safe sex is much better than the option of paying for the result of unprotected sex. In addition before you condemn the women for promiscuity, it takes two people. The boys are equally at fault if you are throwing stones.
The fact she attends an expensive school most likely indicates her parents are well off or she is up to her neck in student loans. I know of very few students who are independently wealthy.
The argument against her request is that if she can afford to attend Georgetown she should also afford birth control. Georgetown will grant her and education that she can then offer to law firms for a fee (salary). This exchange is mainly between the school and the woman. She pays for something the she by in large benefits from.
Birth control give her and her partners the opportunity to engage in sex without getting pregnant. Something they likely both desire. There are also fewer tax / insurance dollars spent on maternity cost and potential government childcare programs for a child the two did not want to conceive. However the woman paid for birth control and the man and taxpayers benefit.
One could argue that both the man and the woman have fiscal consequences from a pregnancy but in practice the woman often has the burden of responsibility and the man often has only a check to pay (if he pays it at all).
Another argument…the more women on birth control the better rate you get from pharma companies so the cost will go down.
I don’t think people often consider this economically rather than socially…..
OK, but from an economic sense how much of our social and tax programs incentivise people to have kids? How many baby factories are popping out kids to collect more Welfare? Do you think any of the 12 Million illegal immigrants in this country are going to rush to the insurance companies to get their “free contraceptives?”
Close those loopholes and maybe people will be more responsible, as well as cut down on social program costs….
Sounds like she is using perfect liberal math! Newsflash: Nothing in life is free! Even the air you breath is maintained by environmental and forestry efforts!It will start with something like contraceptives then add something else, then another….. the “give us everything free” crowd needs to move to a socialistic country and try living under their conditions.
As far as the gender divide on this: Why is it that when folks say “then provide condoms free” the response from liberals is “Men be responsible” yet for women it’s the opposite?
Should insurance companies cover contraceptives? Sure, but at a cost passed onto everyone else!
Maybe I’ll support it if they are mandated for every liberal to take!
http://www.whatthefolly.com/2012/02/23/transcript-sandra-fluke-testifies-on-why-women-should-be-allowed-access-to-contraception-and-reproductive-health-care/
If I may go “old school” for a bit. The very thought that someone would ask me to pay so they could screw just amazes me. The idea that I should facilitate your sex life is the craziest crap ever! To be perfect blunt, the only way I am coming out my pocket for your sex life is, if its my sex life too! I may front you beer money, but I promise I will never front you rubber money!
Woa, Willie, get a grip. Who IS this person that is asking you to pay so they can screw? Wow, I would speak to a law enforcement officer or file a legal complaint. Oh, wait… you want to have sex with this person it sounds – uh, okay I hope you’ll both be very happy.