... and ain't i a woman?: Hidden agendas

Hidden agendas

Women are still an alarmingly long way from having reproductive rights. In recent years, the anti-choice movement has attempted to manipulate debates about women's health and contraception to its own ends.

Any discussion today around the need for more adequate and safe contraception takes into account protection against STDs, especially HIV/AIDS. New HIV infections continue in the heterosexual population. Women, especially women from lower socioeconomic groups, are at risk.

This makes discussions around the prevention of pregnancy, particularly in relation to the use of condoms, all the more important. Safe sex campaigns which encourage the use of condoms and educate people in how to use condoms properly have changed our perspectives.

Our understanding of the term "safe" now means much more than it used to. It not only means protection from pregnancy for heterosexual women. It also means contraceptives must be safe in terms of the health of the woman using them, and safe from STDs.

The only widely used contraceptive today which has the potential to deliver on all of the above points is the condom. This of course also has its problems. The incidence of breakage and misuse is relatively high, and it is far from perfect. Nevertheless, condoms can go a long way in reducing risk, especially if used properly.

The promotion of condoms for safe sex has presented particular dilemmas for the conservative, anti-choice movement. Some claim to be concerned for women's health, yet the use of condoms represents a very minimal risk to women's health. Some claim to be concerned about unwanted pregnancies, yet condoms can prevent pregnancy. Nevertheless, the anti-choice movement has yet to embrace the safe sex message.

This failure to recognise the life-saving potential of condoms exposes the real agenda of the anti-choice movement: its desire to prevent women from exercising real choice over their reproductive potential and their own bodies.

Dr Kevin Hume is international secretary of the World Organisation of the Ovulation Methods (otherwise known as the Billings Method), a Catholic with seven children and a member of NSW Right to Life. He promotes use of the Billings Method as a form of contraception — despite the fact that it is notoriously unreliable for a number of reasons.

Hume is opposed to the use of the contraceptive pill because, he says, there are too many health risks involved with its use. Sounds like a candidate to embrace safe sex campaigns which promote the use of condoms, don't you think? Hume, however, is also against the use of condoms. He claims that encouraging condom use is "irresponsible".

It is clear Hume and others like him are not in the least concerned about women's physical and mental health. The Billings Method certainly doesn't protect against STDs or pregnancy.

The unstated but real intention is to prevent women from exercising real choice, to prevent women from having full reproductive rights. Their anti-choice, anti-sex campaign is nothing less than an attack on women's basic and fundamental rights.

By Kath Gelber

From GLW issue 180