Ruth Institute Blog

Contraceptives didn’t solve all of women’s problems. In fact, they created whole series of new ones.

by Jennifer Roback Morse

This article was first published at Mercatornet.com on December 3, 2014.

I am in the process of writing a book which argues that the Sexual Revolution has been a rich person’s hobby horse from the beginning. The rich and powerful like the idea of separating sex from child-bearing. While this idea is sometimes wrapped up in a disguise of helping woman and the poor, the fact remains that the rich and powerful pioneered and implemented these ideas, quite often at the expense of women and the poor. Read more…

In a recent article, Holly Griggs Spall observes that women on the Pill have many potential problems to deal with, including health concerns, problems with relationships, psychological side-effects and more. She complains that a lack of feminism is the problem.

Why is it that we hear most about the side effects of the pill that directly impact men? It could be because science lacks

The Pill is the greatest thing since sliced bread: move along,now, nothing to see here….

feminism. … In science, as in – one might say grandiosely – life, female hormones are seen as a hindrance.

Who the heck is Holly Griggs Spall, you might ask, and why am I only hearing about her just now?

Before I answer that, I would like to suggest a different answer to the question she poses. While I agree that society generally does see female hormones as a hindrance, I don’t believe women need more “feminism.”

What women really need is to contest the current understanding of “feminism.” In principle, “feminism” could mean any set of ideas and policies that promote the betterment and interests of women.  A “feminist” could be anyone who advocates or works for the improvement in the lives of women.

Such an understanding of feminism is broad enough to include all kinds of people, male or female. It could include men or women who Read more…

Pope Francis beatified Pope Paul VI at the close of the Synod on the Family.  This means two things. First, the Church officially recognizes the personal sanctity of Paul VI. Second, the Church has no intention of backing away from its ancient teachings on artificial contraception. For Paul VI is the author of the 1968 surprise encyclical, Humanae Vitae.  He dashed any hope, inside or outside of the Catholic Church, about a “new day dawning” on the subject of contraception.  And this is why Pope Francis’ decision to honor Paul VI is especially significant. The rich and powerful who promoted the over-population hysteria back in 1968, don’t look so smart today. Meanwhile, Paul VI’s predictions have been proven correct. And we can see now, that he was the one defending the weak, against predatory governments.

Against all the “winds of change,” Paul VI reiterated the ancient teaching of the Catholic Church. (In fact, the prohibition on contraception had been the universal teaching of all the Christian churches right up until 1930, but I digress.) In spite of all pressure arrayed in favor of artificial birth control, Paul VI predicted that this social experiment would end badly.

In paragraph 17 of Humanae Vitae, called Consequences of Artificial Methods, Paul VI makes his predictions, all of which have come to pass. Who can deny that we have an “increase in marital infidelity?” Who can deny that there has been a “general lowering of moral standards?” Who can deny that we have obliterated the incentives for “young people to avoid temptation?” Who can deny that men have “lost their reverence for women?”

But his analysis of the misuse of governmental power deserves special Read more…

I believe we are living under a brutal sexual regime. The Sexual Revolution routinely chews people up and spits them out.

Let me tell you a story about a young woman whom I know by reputation, but have never met. I have inferred some parts of her story, based on my experiences that are in some ways similar to hers.

Karen was the oldest girl in a large Catholic family. She entered nursing school in the 1980’s. At the age of twenty, she left her family home to look for an apartment.  She called an old family friend seeking advice.

The old family friend was a much older man, some forty years older. She moved into the basement of his home. Almost immediately, she entered into a sexual relationship with him. This relationship lasted about six years.  She ended the relationship because she wanted to have children and he didn’t.  He already had grown children from his first marriage. Read more…

My doctor won’t give me Hormone Replacement Therapy to help relieve my menopause symptoms. He says those hormones are associated with increased health risks. Yet, if I were 40 years younger and asked the doctor for oral contraception, he would prescribe it in a snap.  Even though hormone replacement therapy and oral contraceptives consist of similar hormones with similar risks for cancer and other illnesses.

The World Health Organization has classified oral contraceptives as Group 1 carcinogens since at least 2005.   However, they issued a public statement, attempting to reassure the public:

Read more…

The Sexual Revolutionaries are in an uproar over the Hobby Lobby decision. The idea that anyone anywhere objects to paying for someone else’s contraception for any reason whatsoever is all it takes to be labeled “anti-woman.”

Let’s take a sober-minded look at a serious question: Are contraceptive drugs really pro-woman?

A 2012 study[1] of 1.6 million Danish women shows that women who used oral contraceptives at intermediate doses, had a risk of strokes that was 1.3 to 2.3 times as high as the risk among non-users of contraceptives.  Meanwhile, the lowest dose oral contraceptives had risks that were .9 to 1.7 times as great. That is to say, the lower doses are safer, but still not risk-free.[2]

Should we be worried? Listen to the chipper reports on this study. An article in Web MD,  was entitled, “Heart, Stroke Risk Low

With Birth Control Pills: No-Estrogen and Lowest-Estrogen Contraceptives Safest, Study Finds.”

 “Risk today is significantly lower than it was decades ago in the era of high-dose pills,” says University of Copenhagen professor Ojvind Lidegaard, MD, who led the research….In an editorial published with the study, Arizona State University researcher Diana B. Petitti, MD, MPH, writes that the Danish study should reassure women and their doctors about the safety of oral contraceptives.”

Well, perhaps, the risks are lower than they used to be.  But still, the risks of strokes are nearly doubled compared with women who did not use oral contraceptives at all. Isn’t that risk worth taking a bit more seriously? Isn’t that reason enough to explore some non-hormonal family planning alternatives?

The Boston Globe continues with the cheerful reporting.  The title of its article on this study, was, I’m not making this up, “Birth Read more…

The long-term use of oral contraception doubles a woman’s risk of glaucoma and other eye diseases. You never heard this before? Listen to this press release from the American Academy of Ophthalmology:

NEW ORLEANS – Nov. 18, 2013 – Research presented today, at the 117th Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Ophthalmology in New Orleans, has found that women who have taken oral contraceptives for three or more years are twice as likely to suffer from glaucoma, one of the leading causes of blindness which affects nearly 60 million worldwide. The researchers caution gynecologists and ophthalmologists to be aware of the fact that oral

Check your eyes or
flush your pills?

contraceptives might play a role in glaucomatous diseases, and inform patients to have their eyes screened for glaucoma if they also have other risk factors.  (Emphasis added.)

“Inform patients to have their eyes screened.”  Notice they do not caution women to reconsider their decision to take oral contraception in the first place.  I wonder why? The press release goes on: Read more…

The Sexual Revolutionaries are predictably upset by the recent Supreme Court decision in the Hobby Lobby.  So this is a good time to consider the question of whether contraception really is health care in any meaningful sense.  Hormonal contraception interrupts a perfectly natural process in perfectly healthy women. Pregnancy is not an illness or injury or disease. Preventing pregnancy can be accomplished in a number of ways.  Over the next few days, I am going to talk about some of the health risks associated with hormonal contraception.

Let’s start with a few cases from the United Kingdom.

Charlotte Porter died from a blood clot when she was 16.

Trudi Banning, a 22 year old “super-fit” female soldier, was stricken with a stroke that created gangrene in her digestive system, and ultimately left her infertile.

What do these British women have in common? They were taking the so-called “third generation” of birth control pills, such as Femodene and Dianette.  These women are hoping to sue American manufacturers of these “Third Generation” hormonal contraceptives.

The bitter irony for Trudi is that she was an 18 year old virgin when she entered the army and was put on contraception.  She says, ‘The Army didn’t want girls getting pregnant, and Read more…

In my last post, I asked, “Where are the libertarians when we need them?”  (Metaphorically, by asking about Libertarian icon, Murray Rothbard.) I was looking at the truly appalling Reproductive Health Bill, foisted on the people of the Republic of the Philippines, by the United Nations Population Fund, aided and abetted by the United States government.

When the government is taking such a heavy-handed approach to “reproductive health” as to insist on a “Certificate of Compliance” before couples can get married, or to mandate “age-appropriate” sex education, one naturally wonders: what is the problem this legislation is designed to solve? Is there an over-population crisis in the Philippines?

What are the facts?

In the Philippines, the Total Fertility Rate is (are you sitting down? Are you ready for this shocking over-breeding?  Drum roll…..) Read more…

Quick: what are the legitimate activities of government, according to libertarians?

Usually, libertarians will mention a short like including things like national defense, criminal justice, protection of property rights. Some, such as Murray Rothbard, are anarcho-capitalists and believe even these traditional functions of government could and should be handled by the private sector.

Where, then were the libertarians when the United States supported efforts to impose the “Reproductive Health Bill” on the Republic of the Philippines?

This bill mandates that all school children receive Age- and Development-Appropriate Reproductive Health Education. – Read more…