Freddy Zylstra, Author at Nevada County Citizens For Choice

Rape Culture in the U.S. – Causes and Solutions for an Epidemic Problem

June 11, 2015 By Freddy Zylstra

‘Put molly all in her champagne, she ain’t even know it. Took her home and I enjoyed that, she aint’ even know it’.

~ Rapper Rick Ross, in ‘You Ain’t Even Know It’
(‘molly’ refers to MDMA, or Ecstasy)

Rape culture is alive and well in the United States. It asserts that men have a right to women’s bodies, with or without consent.

Nearly 1 in 3 male college students admitted they would rape a woman if they could be certain no one would find out and there would be no consequences, according to a University of North Dakota survey.

respect for personal boundaries is critical — Respect for others boundaries is essential to stopping rape culture

The survey, released in December 2014, contained sobering insight into the students’ definition of rape, depending on the wording of the question rather than an understanding of the behavior. When the question was posed as ‘would you act on intentions to force a woman to have sex’, 31.7% responded ‘yes’.

The researchers changed the wording of the question to ‘would you act on intentions to rape a woman’ and found that only 13.6% said ‘yes’.

Why did the respondents think there was a difference?

The paper, “Denying Rape but Endorsing Forceful Intercourse: Exploring Differences Among Responders,” was released recently in the journal ‘Violence and Gender’.

What the researchers discovered is that those respondents who said they might force a woman to have sex but ‘not rape her’ seemed to have high levels of indifferent sexual attitudes – in other words, they weren’t overtly hostile (as were the group who admitted to thinking that rape was acceptable), but they also didn’t perceive women as individuals who have the right to control their own bodies. It appeared that the respondents felt that acting aggressively was ‘expected’ and ‘manly’.

What cultural and peer behaviors encourage this belief?

In 2013, two Steubenville, Ohio high school football players were convicted and sentenced for the rape of a 16 year old girl. The media was flooded with comments about the young men, who had ‘such promising futures’ and how ‘sad it was their lives were ruined’

In reality, the girl was brutally assaulted by her peers, who transported, undressed, photographed and sexually assaulted her. The boys jokingly shared their crime on social media, posting photos of the rape, saying she was ‘like a dead body’ because she was incapacitated by alcohol. Hundreds of shared photos and text messages making light of the crime were presented as evidence during the trial.

At Kenilworth Junior High School in Petaluma, California, a school administrator informed all the female students that they ‘couldn’t wear tight pants because it caused the boys to be distracted’.

Why did the school feel it was incumbent upon the girls to change their dress and behavior? Purportedly because they feel the boys aren’t able to control themselves. Why not teach mutual respect and boundaries instead? This action inferred that the boys somehow weren’t to blame for their own behavior.

The treatment of women as ‘objects’, and violent behavior exhibited toward them by prominent sports figures such as NFL star Ray Rice sets a terrible example for teen boys who idolize these athletes. Had Mr. Rice’s vicious attack on his then fiancée not been videotaped and widely distributed in the media, it’s entirely possible the NFL would have looked the other way.

Who is responsible for perpetuating the belief that boys don’t need to respect boundaries with girls?

It seems everyone is to blame. Video games, Rap music, sports culture, internet porn, television, lack of action on the part of schools, and peer pressure are all factors. Adolescent and teen boys are getting the message that encourages them to ignore their emotions, objectify and degrade women, and resolve conflict through aggression. The media creates a minefield of gender identity and false expectations of what it means to become a ‘real’ man at a time in boy’s lives when they are struggling with overwhelming feelings of sexuality.

objectifying women in video games — Violent video games often portray women as ‘objects’

Is progress being made?

Arguably not fast enough, though there are programs to mentor young men and promote healthier, non-violent identities based on a set of values which embrace respect for women.

One such program is the Men of Strength Club. This school-based curriculum spans 22 weeks and teaches male teens ages 11-18 appropriate dating and relationship skills. They are encouraged to show their ‘strength’ and masculinity in positive and empathetic ways among their peers.

Winning the 2007 United States Changemakers competition to identify the world’s most innovative domestic violence prevention programs, the Men of Strength Club is now in schools across 10 states, including California.

Obviously, we have a long way to go. Providing fact-based sex education in our schools is one way to open dialog between parents and adolescents – the perfect opportunity to discuss the meaning of healthy relationships. The ‘Know it & Own it’ program developed by Citizens for Choice is a powerful tool in creating a sense of responsibility and respect in teens of both sexes.

Further Reading and Study:

The results of a 2013 National Study on teens and sexual violence: http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/10/08/2748631/national-study-adolescents-sexual-violence/

http://dayofthegirl.org/rape-culture/ This website addresses the neglect and devaluation of girls around the world

http://therepresentationproject.org/films/the-mask-you-live-in/about-the-film/synopsis/
Documentary directed by Jennifer Newsome (Miss Representation) which explores the role of boys as they grow up with stereotypes and expectations of a society that condones aggression.

Why our Community Needs The Clinic! and Women’s Health Specialists

December 28, 2014 By Freddy Zylstra

An unsuspecting woman suddenly in need of assistance with an unplanned pregnancy, birth control, or facts about her reproductive health may look to a local clinic for help. It is likely to be the first time she has consulted with anyone for these needs. How can she know the information she’ll receive is factual and comprehensive?

She does an online search. A nice-looking clinic is advertising that they help women with these issues, and from the looks of it, the staff is compassionate and well-informed. But what this woman doesn’t realize is that she has reached a Crisis Pregnancy Center with a definite agenda that doesn’t include her best interests.

Crisis Pregnancy Center staff, in their mission to protect the unborn at all cost, feel its okay to lie to pregnant mothers and young women seeking advice about their reproductive health as long as their agenda is successful.

The goal is to coerce pregnant women into carrying the fetus full-term or as a last resort consider adoption. Any woman who asks about terminating a pregnancy is given a laundry list of lies designed to scare her into quickly dispensing with the idea. These clinics also often counsel women against birth control methods and shame them for wanting to have sex if they aren’t married.

Yet these centers advertise that they’ll help pregnant women with their choices and offer ‘educational’ services for women.

The documentary ‘Misconception’ chronicles the experiences of three women who went undercover to centers that advertised they would help women make ‘choices’. Their investigation was secretly filmed and revealed shocking deceit and lies on the part of the centers’ workers.

Many of these ‘centers’ receive government funding. They are careful not to appear anti-abortion in their advertising – because this will bring women into the clinics who are seeking abortions, which they hope to stop. While not all ‘pregnancy crisis centers’ employ these methods, here are some of the lies told to women who venture in either looking for factual counseling, contraception, education or termination:

One of the women in the documentary was asked “Why do you have sex?” and was then informed that there has to be meaning behind intercourse. “You don’t have sex to make yourself feel good.”
Condoms are “naturally porous” and do not protect against STDs (This is, of course, untrue)
“Abortion causes extremely high, increased risk of breast cancer” that “can be as much as an 80% increase depending upon how the risk factors fall into place.” (The National Institute of Health finds no connection whatsoever between abortion and any kind of cancer.)
30 percent of women who get abortions die within the first year due to complications. (In fact, the risk of death from childbirth in the first 20 weeks of pregnancy is 11 times greater than that of abortion – after 20 weeks, the risk is the same).
At one CPC technicians were caught tapping out “messages” from unborn babies (“hi mommy and daddy”) as they perform ultrasounds, making the inference that the first trimester fetus can recognize and even speak to its parents.
A Jewish woman who posed as a pregnant woman as part of an investigation was told at five centers that she wouldn’t go to heaven unless she converted to Christianity.
91% of “services” at Planned Parenthood in 2010 were abortions. (The actual number is about 3%)
“Birth control and the ‘morning-after pill’ are abortifacients. (meaning they cause abortion)” In fact, they prevent conception from occurring at all.
One of the women who went undercover for the documentary was given a sonogram, shown a plastic ‘replica’ of a supposedly 12 week old fetus and sternly lectured about morality and religion. The ‘replica’, by the way, was a very small but completely developed doll made to look like a 6 month old baby.

As long as centers reveal they don’t offer counseling which includes the choice of abortion, are clear that they follow an anti-abortion position and religious beliefs, that would be fine. They could also be honest that they don’t condone birth control or sex outside marriage so women can make their own decision about whether or not to visit. Few centers are so straightforward, since they desire to ‘convert’ those who don’t share their opinions.

To use deception and lies to promote a clinic that receives taxpayer funding is reprehensible. Our local ‘Crisis Pregnancy Center’ offers lovely language on their services page, offering to ‘help you make an informed choice’ and offers a ‘friendly, safe, non-judgmental environment for you to talk about your options and ask questions about parenting, adoption and abortion’. Sounds very helpful and open, doesn’t it? The only counseling you’ll receive about abortion is that it is not an option.

http://www.dreamstime.com/stock-images-doctor-teenage-patient-image28561064 — Unbiased information about all options.

Contrary to the erroneous opinion of the well-meaning staff at crisis pregnancy centers, The Clinic!, run by Citizens for Choice and Women’s Health Specialists, does not advocate abortion for every pregnant woman. Abortion is not performed at The Clinic! – instead, women who choose to terminate a pregnancy are referred to the Chico or Sacramento Clinic. Abortion accounts for only about 4% of the total services offered. The Clinic! Offers truly unbiased options based on scientific fact. Women are encouraged to explore all options so they may come to a decision which is right for them. It’s a personal decision- one which is respected by the staff. In fact, education is the primary mission of Citizens for Choice, with a new program launched just this year called ‘Know it and Own it’. According to The Guttmacher Institute, nearly 50% of teens don’t learn about their reproductive health from their parents, and instead, rely on often incorrect information from friends. This program aims to create a generation of teens who are well-informed about their reproductive health and have a sense of empowerment based on knowledge, confidence and acceptance.

Why do we need The Clinic! in our community? It’s the only place where men and women of any age and sexual orientation can truly get unbiased, science-based, medically accurate and comprehensive information and counseling from staff whose only agenda is to help them be empowered and informed.

The History of Citizens for Choice in our Community

October 18, 2014 By Freddy Zylstra

We’ve reached a milestone.

The small group of women who envisioned greater access to reproductive health care and unbiased, informative planning in 1989 knew something had to be done in our community. We were too small and rural to warrant a Planned Parenthood clinic – and many of those residents truly in need of services didn’t have the ability to travel to gain access to those services.

Education was an immediate need. At Silver Springs High School (the county school with programs for young mothers), the school nurse reported that the overwhelming consensus among students was that getting pregnant was desirable, because they would receive more welfare money. These young mothers didn’t envision a choice for themselves – either in their reproductive health or their lives.

Nevada County was overwhelmingly conservative in 1989. The LivingWell clinic, an anti-abortion advocate, had opened its doors in 1986, its intention to influence and coerce young pregnant women to consider only full-term pregnancy as an option. No organization existed to provide medically accurate, truthful, complete education and options to those in need.

Women from The American Association of University Women (ww.aauwnevadacounty.org), Business & Professional Women of Nevada County (bpwnevadacounty.org), and the League of Women Voters (www.lwvwnc.org) formed an alliance to provide education about reproductive choice. They decided their first priority was to begin encouraging public dialogue.

Armed with pamphlets and medically accurate information from pro-choice organizations outside Nevada County, these women held their first public information seminar. They were thrilled when a deluge of attendees arrived. The excitement was short-lived, however, when they discovered the attendees were present only to prevent the presentation from taking place and to remove the entire supply of educational pamphlets. They decided to reorganize and become better prepared for future presentations.

These early founders were astounded that there was an organized effort to suppress facts about pregnancy and abortion. They were accused of being pro-abortion. In fact, just like today, no one was advocating that young women rush to have abortions the moment they discovered they were pregnant. What they did advocate for was education and empowerment – based on unbiased, informative family planning and access to reproductive health care. This alliance of women strongly felt that choice – the choice to have children or not – and when – is an absolute right for all people.

The ensuing years brought change – but it was slow and often discouraging. Citizens for Choice became an independent organization in 1992. Its founders dreamed of providing a clinic for Nevada County, but felt it might never come to fruition.

Were it not for the dedication, courage and hard work of the women who met 25 years ago with a shared vision of supporting reproductive choice, we would not now be celebrating this milestone anniversary.

Today, Citizens for Choice is a member organization of the California Coalition for Reproductive Freedom (CCRF), a statewide reproductive and sexual health, rights, and justice coalition of more than 30 independent organizations. We are partners with Women’s Health Specialists for The Clinic!, our reproductive health care clinic in Grass Valley, which was opened in 2006. We provide education through our ‘Know it and Own it’ program. Our advocate partner, C.H.O.I.C.E.S., promotes reproductive justice and education at Sierra College.

Join us in celebrating our 25^th Anniversary! A ‘Decadent Desserts’ fundraiser is planned for Thursday, November 20^th, 2014 from 6:00 – 8:00 p.m. at the Historic Powell House in Nevada City. Have you been craving the luscious taste of Chocolate Grand Marnier cake? Give in to your desires! Your senses will be soothed by voluptuous desserts baked lovingly by Upper Crust Bakery in Chico; your ears caressed by the soulful music of Aedryan Gantt. You will be supporting a great organization with your modest donation (suggested $25 in honor of 25 years of service).

RSVP via e-mail at info@citizensforchoice.org and honor the commitment and vision of Citizens for Choice and the difference we make in our community.

Facts and Fallacies about the HPV Vaccine

August 18, 2014 By Freddy Zylstra

The HPV Vaccine, which guards against Human Papilloma Virus, has been available since June, 2006.

Few side effects have been reported; in fact, according to VAERS (the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System) nearly all reactions to the HPV vaccine have been very mild, compared to other vaccines, such as MMR (Measles, Mumps and Rubella) and DPT (Diphtheria, Pertussis and Tetanus).

Vaccine reactions are typically a low fever or mild pain at the injection site although there remains much controversy about the vaccine’s safety and scare tactics abound. Even vaccines which cause higher incidence of serious reaction than the HPV vaccine are still exponentially safer than the diseases they prevent.

HPV is a common but potentially serious group of viruses, of which more than 100 strains exist. Most men and women, by the time they reach adulthood, have been exposed to this virus. In 90% of the cases, our immune system clears the virus within two years.

About 30% of the strains are sexually transmitted. Of these, a few are considered ‘high-risk’. They may cause abnormal Pap tests and can lead to cancer of the cervix, vagina, vulva, penis or anus. Others, called ‘low-risk’ strains may result in genital warts or even cause Pap test abnormalities.

Cervical cancer is the most serious complication of the HPV virus. Nearly 4,000 women in the United States die annually from this disease – worldwide, the numbers are a staggering 270,000.

So why does the controversy still exist over a vaccine which has been proven to prevent the HPV virus?

According to a Reuter’s article, the scare over the vaccine was fueled, in large part, by Michele Bachmann during her run for the 2012 Republican Presidential Nomination. One of Bachmann’s rivals, Texas Governor Rick Perry, had mandated the vaccine as part of the Texas state school vaccination program in 2007 (It was subsequently overturned.) In a 2011 debate, Bachmann seized upon an opportunity to make her rival look bad, saying he ‘forced innocent little girls to have a government injection that was potentially dangerous”. The next day, while on the Today show, Bachmann added fuel to the fire by claiming she knew of a woman whose daughter had become ‘mentally retarded’ after receiving the vaccine.

The American Academy of Pediatrics tried to quell the controversy caused by Bachmann’s unsubstantiated and self-serving remarks by issuing a statement which contained actual facts, backed by scientific research, which showed the vaccine to be safe.

In fact, so incredulous were some of the country’s top Bioethicists, that two offered rewards if Bachmann could produce proof that even one person suffered such a reaction. (One of the rewards was in excess of $10,000.) They offered to donate the rewards to Bachmann’s favorite charity and invited her to ‘put her money where her mouth was’ by donating to their charity of choice should she fail to produce a victim.

Bachmann’s campaign never replied. She never collected the reward, as she remained silent, apparently unable to find anyone with a reaction worse than a sore arm or mild headache.

As is typical, however, outlandish claims by dramatic and power-inebriated political candidates seem to get more air time than scientists talking about real facts. Possibly this is because scientists tend to behave in a calmer, more self-restrained style, which is good for science but bad for television.

Because of the dramatic accusation made by a political candidate (whose career was in law – not science), internet scare stories have proliferated in spite of a profound lack of substantive evidence.

A survey done by the American Academy of Pediatrics showed that 85% of parents planned to have their child vaccinated. Twelve percent were ‘undecided’, and cited claims made on the internet as the reason for their fear. Three percent were adamant they would not vaccinate under any circumstances, apparently fearful their offspring might not be able to comprehend a fact-deficient political debate in the future.

It’s clear that science and facts are winning the battle, but there remains much to be accomplished to educate parents of girls in middle school about the benefits of HPV prevention. Citizens for Choice supports this education, as they support all education for men and women alike to foster reproductive health.

How Men’s Attitudes About Sex, Affection and Their Bodies Affect Their Health

June 21, 2014 By Freddy Zylstra

Men, affection, and sex. The subject could fill volumes, if only they would talk about it – openly and honestly.

They are taught from a very young age to pursue sexual encounters. Pre-adolescent boys are often exposed early to thinking of women as objects, even by well-meaning parents. A father, mesmerized by a beer commercial featuring a nearly naked woman, can send a message – they are bodies, not people. As always, a parent’s actions, rather than words, teach a child.

Adding to the onslaught of movies, television, and advertisements objectifying women, many men have a difficult time differentiating affection from sex. Often parents are lavishly and openly affectionate with girls, and little boys are expected to stoically refrain from spontaneous hugging and kissing with their fathers. In his article, ‘A Scarcity of Affection Among Men’( http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/j1b-a-scarcity-of-affection-among-men/), Jackson Bliss speaks of men learning to seek affection as sexual behavior, as opposed to social behavior. According to Bliss, it leaves a terrible wound in the male psyche – the remnants of a little boy who just needed to be hugged more often by the male role-models in his life.

Gender stereotypes are alive and well, with women winning hands down in the affection department. We openly hug our sisters, mothers, and friends. We brush each other’s hair. We collaborate, share, laugh and cry together. It’s harder for men to form close, meaningful friendships with other men that don’t involve some shared physical activity such as baseball, bowling, or car racing.

How does this affect men’s sexual health? They typically aren’t as open or forthcoming when discussing their sexual health with their physician. As a society, we appear to reinforce that behavior. ‘Well-Woman’ visits are now a part of the Affordable Health Care Act. What about ‘Well-Man’ care? Why is it we encourage men by virtue of omission to only seek care when they are writhing on the floor in agony? Why aren’t physicians taught the huge differences in communication styles between men and women – and how to initiate a more effective conversation with their male patients?

Many young women have annual gynecological visits beginning when they are teens, which include a pelvic exam, pap test, vaccinations, and even sexual health counseling. This early interaction with a health care provider who encourages them to ask questions and bring up issues simply makes women more comfortable with the process in general. Young men are mostly treated with the attitude ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’, and never see a doctor for a sexual health issue unless they have a serious problem. In fact, fewer than 25% of boys age 15-19 receive any sexual health counseling, while the number for girls is 66%.

In a 2011 health survey for men conducted by Esquire Magazine, prostate exams caused men the most anxiety, despite the fact that cancer was the disease they most feared. In spite of their fears, only 45% of men actually went to the doctor, compared to a majority of women. Men in this survey (which was, not surprisingly, anonymous) also admitted that talking to a doctor about their genitals, bowels, or mental health was embarrassing.

How do we help men become more comfortable both in seeking early medical care and talking about their bodies? How do we help them learn that they, too, are responsible for their sexual health and that of their partners? That affection and sexual desire aren’t always the same emotion?

Start early. If you have a son, encourage him to share his affection with the men in his life. Fatherhood is shifting, with more men taking an active role in the raising of children. Talk with your spouse about the mental and physical health benefits of showing affection. Support organizations such as Planned Parenthood and Citizens for Choice – The Clinic! in their endeavor to provide reproductive health care and education to men and women equally.

Best of all, keep the conversation going. Share this blog with the men in your life. Give them a hug and tell them the greatest gift they could give you is their long-term health.

Rape Culture in the U.S. – Causes and Solutions for an Epidemic Problem

Why our Community Needs The Clinic! and Women’s Health Specialists

The History of Citizens for Choice in our Community

Facts and Fallacies about the HPV Vaccine

How Men’s Attitudes About Sex, Affection and Their Bodies Affect Their Health

Recent Posts

Please Follow & Like Us