Female Ohio Democrat Introduces Bill To Regulate Men’s Sexual Health

10183433-largeEpic trolling from Ohio state Senator Nina Turner. I love this response to male Republican efforts to curtail women’s access to birth control and abortion (including the anti-abortion “Heartbeat Bill” just introduced in Ohio by Rep. Lynn Wachtmann). The Dayton Daily News writes:

Before getting a prescription for Viagra or other erectile dysfunction drugs, men would have to see a sex therapist, receive a cardiac stress test, receive information about “pursuing celibacy as a viable lifestyle choice,” and get a notarized affidavit signed by a sexual partner affirming impotency, if state Sen. Nina Turner has her way.

The Cleveland Democrat introduced Senate Bill 307 this week. Turner said, “I certainly want to stand up for men’s health and take this seriously and legislate it the same way mostly men say they want to legislate a woman’s womb.”

90 Comments on "Female Ohio Democrat Introduces Bill To Regulate Men’s Sexual Health"

  1. Thats…. actually pretty funny.

    • It is unless they start taking her seriously an pass it. Imagine that nightmare, especially if the republicans got behind her..

      • It wont happen. Republicans are hypocrites and are not anti-fucking. They just wanta control the female sex power. 

  2. This is awesome!!! 

  3. That, is an epic troll.

    Good on her!

  4. HA – awesome. 

  5. Marklar_Prime | Mar 12, 2012 at 5:34 pm |

    Your time would be better spent fighting the fascist police state the U.S. has become instead of focusing on such minor issues in a time of extreme crisis, but bravo on the table turning.

    • Jin The Ninja | Mar 12, 2012 at 6:04 pm |

      how is the ‘war on women’ and ‘women’s health’ by the same fascist right wing forces in any way “minor” ?

      • Because i’m not a woman and, people who are not me are not important, of course.

        • Well the fact that America is becoming a police state, in which “democracy” is simply a facade is relatively more important than “war on women”. And it would be more important than the “war on men” if there was one. It’s all about perspective.

          • Jin The Ninja | Mar 12, 2012 at 8:39 pm |

            actually, the ‘war on women’ is both symptomatic and demonstrative of the fascist nature of american politics. and women’s health has never been well protected in the US, and in the increasingly right wing nature of political discourse, what little gains historically were made, have been seriously erroded. There is  no ‘war on men,’ and to posit that as an equivelence is grossly intellectually dishonest.

          • Hadrian999 | Mar 12, 2012 at 8:41 pm |

            the current war on women is quite similar to the policies of Nazi Germany to get women to go back to being house wives and baby factories.

            actually there are many similarities, the war on art, the fixation on “real america” cult of the military….

          • Jin The Ninja | Mar 12, 2012 at 9:39 pm |

            all very true. fascists hate civil liberties, so they errode the rights of easily targated groups first, before they move on to the rest.

          • Mysophobe | Mar 12, 2012 at 9:51 pm |

            Too right. The logical central front would be marginalizing half of the population and the children in their care. The war against women IS the war. Wake up, men!

          • Marklar_Prime | Mar 13, 2012 at 8:01 am |

            Any doctor/engineer/mechanic/technician can tell you that treating symptoms doesn’t cure systemic problems.

          • Jin The Ninja | Mar 13, 2012 at 1:29 pm |

            so just let them win the battle, and when women have no rights- and they go after yours only your little group will be standing in solidarity with eachother.

          • Marklar_Prime | Mar 14, 2012 at 6:32 am |

            And you’ll be so glad you have control over your reproduction while they are tossing you and your family into the wood chipper because you didn’t tip your hat as the feurer rode by.

          • Jin The Ninja | Mar 14, 2012 at 11:31 am |

            your reply doesn’t even make sense in context to what you said. You said the war on women was a “minor” issue, but it is integral to the whole issue of fascists taking over and eliminating civil rights. what i think you’re saying is that we should forgo this battle to win the war, but the reality is THIS battle is the war.

          • Marklar_Prime | Mar 14, 2012 at 10:42 pm |

            Wrong again, try again?

          • Jin The Ninja | Mar 15, 2012 at 1:50 am |

            i don’t think it is wrong, i think you don’t have a clearly defined position, and i don’t think your position, as it stands defined, is teneable or a cogent assesment of the situation.

          • Mysophobe | Mar 13, 2012 at 7:09 pm |

            You say that as if you have some sort of point. What, pray tell, is the systemic problem with women?

          • its the systemic problem that causes the oppression of women… good try though. he actually makes quite an interesting point.

          • Mysophobe | Mar 14, 2012 at 9:25 am |

            His point seems to be that one should apply cold logic to systems involving a human population. No point addressing the symptoms of the problem until we can address the cause, right? No, that’s not how a doctor/engineer/mechanic/technician operates. It’s about best outcome, not perfect outcome. Especially when a human life is involved. If Marklar’s point is that there are deeply entrenched institutions that attempt to marinalize women then well, duh. Good luck getting rid of those.

      • MoralDrift | Mar 13, 2012 at 10:01 am |

        Mainly because the abortion issue Was, Is, and Always Will Be a wedge issue. In light of the massive reinterpretations of our human rights across the board the abortion issue is not that important. That being said, I believe it is a simple issue of choice and I also applaud her actions…..but I do think there are so many more important issues at stake

  6. DeepCough | Mar 12, 2012 at 5:37 pm |

    What a dick move. And from a female, no less!

  7. just the other side of the same coin…both wrong, both fascist.

    • It might seem that way, but one is a serious attempt to control people
      while the other is a facetious ploy to bring attention to said control freaks.

      • It’s her choice. Why do you FREAKS think it’s any of your business? Look at the big picture. The world is starving, but we must save the non human inside the cracked out teenager who got herself with a cracked up sperm.

    •  Since when is preventing a woman from murdering her child wrong?

      • Jin The Ninja | Mar 12, 2012 at 10:32 pm |

        since when is a man telling a woman what to do with her body, considered democratic and equalitarian? and since when is being pro-women’s health and women’s right- murderous in any capacity?

        • Hadrian999 | Mar 12, 2012 at 10:40 pm |

           i say go back to the old norse standard, not person til it’s named

        • so its only men who have said you can’t kill you baby?  Im confused on that

          • Jin The Ninja | Mar 12, 2012 at 11:51 pm |

            men should not tell women what to do with their bodies. it has nothing to do with conception or pregnancy. men primarly are the ones making and enacting laws to prevent abortion. women did not have rights as people until sufferage, and long after then they still didn’t have ‘equal rights.’ and still today, a culture of misogyny, sexualisation, and patriarchy is pervasive in institutional democracy. christianity, as it stands institutionally is patriarchal, and since most of the objections of abortion (actually in fact CHOICE) are derived from judeo christian arguements, it comes down to body sovereignty of a person, whether man or woman. and in fact abortion should have nothing to do with the value judgements other people place on it. If someone choses not to have one, that is their CHOICE, if someone choses to have one- that is THEIR choice. their right to CHOOSE should be legal.

          • It isn’t biblical, though the right will scream and foam at the mouth if you say so.  In fact, in Jewish law killing a fetus was not the evil it is seen as today.  The woman’s life was actually more important than the fetus she carried and yep it was codified into old Jewish law. Look at Exodus 21:22.  The offender in question isn’t immediately given the death penalty as usual with murder but the punishment is left to the discretion of the woman’s husband (more than likely the debt would have been monetary).

          • Jin The Ninja | Mar 13, 2012 at 1:25 pm |

            thank you for that post. really informative. i was aware that textually, there was almost no basis for the belief in modern christianity, but like in so many things, right wingers forget to actually read the book they pretend to venerate.

            i checked out the citation, and of course you are right- her life was more ‘important’ than her ‘fruit. ‘

          •  yes- but, unfortunately, it takes two to tango and, (I’m a woman)I really don’t see how fair it is to tell a male that he has no control over his offspring at all if the woman says so. Where are his reproductive rights? Honestly, ladies, if you don’t want to get pregnant because you don’t want a “little parasite” growing inside you, keep yer F***ING legs closed and take some damn responsibility for yourself and your choices.

          • Jin The Ninja | Apr 5, 2012 at 9:45 am |

            obviously the nuance and irony of this article are completely lost on you, your juvenile condemnation of sexual sovereignty only demonstrates a repressed victorian morality that has no place in the contemporary world, especially in an adult conversation about reproductive health.

      • Anarchy Pony | Mar 12, 2012 at 10:40 pm |

        Because it isn’t a child. It is a clump of cells, it does not possess awareness or consciousness. It doesn’t develop anything remotely close to awareness until the late stages of pregnancy.

        • Monkey See Monkey Do | Mar 13, 2012 at 10:23 am |

          Good point. But how late into the pregnancy?

          • Anarchy Pony | Mar 13, 2012 at 1:44 pm |

            Hard to judge, but probably not at least until the third trimester.

          • Inflictor | Mar 13, 2012 at 4:43 pm |

            I’m not sure you have to wait for conscious awareness before the argument against abortion becomes fair. Afterall, any intentional movement may be the signs of consciousness at a very basic level. That kind of intentionality may begin as early as 10 weeks: http://www.baby2see.com/development/week10.html

            Perhaps it shouldn’t be called “murder”, just as killing an animal isn’t “murder” and we can’t call it a child until it is actually born, but at the very least it is “putting down” a living being inside a person.I’ll never understand trying to restrict the woman’s ability to make that choice, but I also don’t think we should pretend there is no beauty in the fetus.

          • Pecker Brown | Mar 13, 2012 at 2:51 pm |

             No more than 45 years.

          • How early in toddler hood? Casey Anthony!

      • Since when did all you do-gooders decide that you have the right to dictate someone elses life choices?

      • Calypso_1 | Mar 13, 2012 at 4:55 pm |

        Spontaneous abortion occurs in up to 50% of fertilizations.  The Almighty knew you before you were formed in the womb.   Jehovah is thus the largest provider of abortion services on the planet and is responsible for the murder of countless innocent persons and the untold sufferings of the women deprived of their motherhood. 

        • Bother them not with facts, silly wabbit.

          • Calypso_1 | Mar 14, 2012 at 2:00 pm |

            Silly indeed yes I am, but always have felt stronger kinship with family Mustelidae than Leporidae.

          • Jin The Ninja | Mar 14, 2012 at 2:34 pm |

            of course, otters, ferrets and polecats are siick. how do you feel about eupleridae?

          • Calypso_1 | Mar 14, 2012 at 4:35 pm |

            I have only had personal contact with family Herpestidae but I might suppose they possess similar traits.
            Herpestidae in my experience, though bold and ruthless seemed not to possess the maniacal mirth of the mustelid.

          • Jin The Ninja | Mar 14, 2012 at 6:42 pm |

            that’s what i’ve always like about mustelids. they’re wacky that way.

  8. Mamagriff50 | Mar 12, 2012 at 8:11 pm |

    Allright Senator Turner!!!!!       :):):):):)

  9. I’d have no problem at all with letting this pass, but I would with some of the anti-abortion/contraception ones.

  10. Bravo Rep. Lynn Wachtmann…

    Kick those ignorant, self rightous, right wing conservatives, in the balls, where they deserve it….!!

  11. I thought this was rather tongue-in-cheek.

  12. Apathesis | Mar 12, 2012 at 10:35 pm |

    I will never have to worry.  I have problems keeping it down…

  13. Problem, Republicans?

  14. Ann-onymous | Mar 13, 2012 at 12:14 am |

    this is a ridiculous comparison.  my guess is that this lady had an abortion years ago and is doing everything in her power to justify it because she can’t get the blood of that baby off of her hands.  she’s probably a man hater and trying to get back at men in general for one dude getting her pregnant.  getting an erection and ending a life are two entirely different things. and to the douche bag who said that the clump of cells doesn’t even resemble a human until the end of the pregnancy, well, you are some kind of ignorant. 

    • Anarchy Pony | Mar 13, 2012 at 12:25 am |

      You have a good view from up there on your “moral” high horse? Why don’t you give me your full list of every kind of thing it is and is not okay to kill, and in what circumstances, then I’ll accept it without question, because you have obviously got it figured out without a doubt. And I’m sure your reasoning is entirely flawless and without reproach. 

    • I didn’t realize people so stupid still existed outside of the Ron Paul fandom.

    • I did not realize people so stupid still existed outside of Demopublican fandom.

    • Hadrian999 | Mar 13, 2012 at 1:53 am |

       next thing you’ll say is we can’t treat any of the other STD’s

    • Bwahahahaha!


      that’s the sound of this article going over your head, what are you? Some kind of ignorant?

    • Not according to the Bible so many of you nitwits claim to adhere to (when it’s convenient). Spilling your seed upon the ground is a sin, loser.

      Personally, I think you should find someplace more enlightened to derive political guidance from. You know, something a tad newer than an Iron Age book.

      I could give a rat’s ass what the clump of cells looks like. The fact of the matter is, it has no rights under the law. The Constitution LITERALLY only covers “persons BORN”. We don’t give death certificates to miscarriages, and we don’t give citizenship based upon where you conceived. In no other area of law does this silliness apply.

      If you want to change that, then write and amendment and get the fucker passed. And then deal with all the consequences of things like citizenship issues and the like. Otherwise, shut your pie hole.

      And BTW, if you were to pass such a thing, posit this – you still wouldn’t reduce abortions. In fact, you’d only increase the number of deaths. Abortions would still go on, and women would start dying too. Way to be “pro-life”.

      In countries like Chile, where they have all the crazy laws that slobbering trolls such as yourself want (even helping a woman get an abortion is punishable by 5 years in jail and a hefty fine), the abortion rate is twice as many abortions as a place like Canada. And Chile has half the population of Canada. 

      So we’ve established objectively that anti-abortion laws do nothing to actually prevent abortions.

      So clearly the purpose of such laws isn’t to “protect life” since clearly, they do the opposite.

      So what could be their real purpose….? Hmmm……

      Oh yeah! Subjugating women. 

      These laws are VERY good at that. 

      And THAT is the real goal of such laws, so cut the “pro-life” crap. You people could give a shit about life.

    • Well, let’s take away birth control, abortion, and foodstamps; that will certainly make the world a better place. Dead, Starved, toddlers laying all over the streets.

  15. Countering oppression with more oppression, great idea!

  16. Beauty! The sad truth though is that FOXombies are already more than capable of maintaining contradictory logic in their minds and will miss the point of her actions while simultaneously accusing her of over-reaching or frivolity or of being a fascist while obtusely defending their like minded (but lacking a sense of humour or irony) idiocy. 

  17. I saw this news at least 2 weeks ago on daily show. A bit old, no?

  18. sweetrats | Mar 13, 2012 at 6:44 am |

    Let’s take this a little further. These proposals should NOT be covered by insurance!

  19. Liam_McGonagle | Mar 13, 2012 at 11:15 am |

    Unfortunately, the motion failed on a point of order . . . Two points, actually:

    1.)  Ms. Turner approached the floor wearing a jolly floral-themed blouse like the one pictured above, rather than the sombre black House-issued burqa;

    2.) She spoke to the legislature directly, instead of through her male guardian, as per Roberts’

  20. Rebthomason | Mar 13, 2012 at 3:36 pm |

    This has never been an issue of access to birth control. Whether the mandate passed or not, women would still have access to it. There is mass confusion about this. It is about freedom of religion, which is guaranteed by the constitution. This mandate is in violation of the right. 

    • Marklar_Prime | Mar 14, 2012 at 6:35 am |

      I do believe you are referring to the wrong piece of legislation but you are still dead wrong either way.

    • Jgilson55 | Mar 22, 2012 at 11:00 am |

      What about my freedom of religion.  Isn’t them pushing their religious beliefs off on me violating my freedom of religion.  By the way, I am a 48 year old woman who gets a birth control shot to stablilize my hormones which are all over the place.  What kind of religion can find fault with this?  Once again, men need to stay out of something they know nothing about.

  21. Enixam1925 | Mar 14, 2012 at 1:14 am |

    Ann-onymous  Do you not understand that sperm is 50% responsible for a life, so lets allow insurance to pay for erections.  But tell women to put an aspirin between their legs so they don’t get pregnant.  Maybe people should truly only have sex for conception…. like that is ever going to happen.  People have sex and not just for conception.  And just like your closed minded personal nasty comments you blame the women.  So let the insurance buy the men Viagra and maybe they should screw each other… problem solved.  You gotta love freedom of speech, free thinking and humor. Keep your religion out of my life, you are shoving your religious views on other people that don’t feel the same way you do.
    P.S.S.  I’m not a man hater, never had an abortion but I have taking the PILL.

  22. Yea its funny, but lets remove the sperm part of this whole equation and it all of a sudden becomes a non issue.  I think that a more reasonable approach would be for women all over the united states to forgo having sex with anyone until the efforts of any elected official are stopped.  The government does not have ANY control over the decisions we make with our bodies they belong to us and not to the legislators.  NO SEX WITH ANYONE and see how quickly they undig their own graves.

  23. Enixam1925 | Mar 15, 2012 at 1:40 am |

    Right on….. Kdvine, I agree with you !!!!  There is already a Facebook page no sex for a week.  How do we spread the word, women need to stand up when it comes to making decisions regarding their own (WOMEN’S) bodies.  My body does not belong to anyone but ME.

  24. Stupid is as stupid does. So fighting fire with fire eh? But do 2 wrongs make a right? Both sides so stupid, just leave us all alone govt.! This is none of their business for either gender, period. Rs and Ds both need to keep the F out of our bedrooms and lives!

  25. I thought this was about all the limp dicks running around knocking up teenage girls, then voting yes on Pro-Life Bills. You know, all the dead beat dads in the congress.

Comments are closed.