filed a motion to impose stricter limits on o
btaining wildly popular erectile dysfunction drugs like Viagra and Cialis.
A-men! Aye. Man!
UNDER THIS PROPOSED BILL:
Under the proposed bill, only a physician can write the prescription for the drug (because as you know, men can legally order Viagra without a prescription).
- 24-hour waiting period before secured (don’t you have to wait to get a gun?)
In addition to this, the patient would have to sign a form acknowledging he was notified by his physician–the potential risks and complications involved with taking the drug that too, the doctor has a kind of truth in bending lending-like responsibility at stake: Under the penalty of perjury he/she will acknowledge that prescribing the drug was necessary to treat a man’s real and true erectile dysfunction as determined by the discretion of the doctor.
- affidavit from partner, confirming erectile dysfunction as true condition (don’t you have to get a script/permission to get cold meds?)
This bill also slows the rapid availability of the pill with its waiting period (unspecified as yet) however, the script can’t be issued less than 24 hours after the patient has signed and acknowledged that he was notified of the drug’s possible side effects.
- cardiac stress tests (as, many men take Viagra without this and possible cardiac arrest is a risk in taking the drug…she MIGHT be saving lives here!)
While prescription granted, the patient would also have to undergo three counseling sessions during a six month period with sessions reiterating the risks and other non-pharmaceutical options for erectile dysfunction e.g.: counseling and celibacy.
- sex therapy visits (as, if one truly has erectile dysfunction, therapy is helpful and often time necessary…this WILL be helpful for true ED sufferes!)
Modestly speaking, McLeod says she recognizes the
Related: WHEN SOCIAL MEDIA EDUCATES MEN AND MASSES ON THE POLITICS OF…
“absurdity” in the bill stipulation “Who am I to tell them that? But by the same token, who are they to tell us what to do with our bodies?”
She is hoping that the proposed bill sparks sensible debate about how invasive the “requirements” are (in order to create obstacles) in the way of a woman’s right to choose that (by the same token) the other ‘tool’ involved helping create that “life” inside a woman too, is put under the same scrutiny (when purchasing drugs that give men their sexual confidence and lives back).
Although her goal and determination is to get misogynistic, old-school, right-wing good ole boys and government out of the wombs and will of women the world over, I hardly see her proposal any more “absurd” than the processes it takes to:
- buy guns
- buy cough syrup (and other once upon a time over counter cold remedies)
and now:
- the right to choose to have an abortion
If a woman’s right to choose to have an abortion can be regulated, then why shant the materials that aided and a bedded abetted the “tool” that helped her procreate be “regulated.”
The fact of the matter is, not
Spitfire .
Media Maestro .
Writing Rhinoceros .
