It’s understandable that health insurance companies elect to pay for Viagra for men, as a lack of Viagra can be quite distressing for those particular men who need the . . . er, assistance. However, for health insurance companies to willingly pay for Viagra, a recreational drug, and then deny drugs that are much more necessary for women, seems sexist. Taking birth control, for some women, is a matter of sexual health, whereas for others it is merely a tool in the process of having safe sex. Birth control can be used for medical reasons that are much more serious and necessary than Viagra, yet, even in these cases, insurance will not cover the cost of the medication.

For women with cystic, or poly cystic ovaries, birth control is not just a matter of sexual health, but a matter of overall well being. If a woman needs birth control in order to be reproductive, in order to keep herself fertile, then her insurance company should pay for these cheap pills, rather than forcing her down a road that ends with $15,000 sperm injections in the vain hopes of having babies from an infertile womb. The average birth control costs $420 per year. If a health insurance company pays for birth control for the average duration of medication for an average female in the United States, it would equal $10,080 (based upon the typical 24 years of use). Even women who hit menopause late in life would be less expensive to insure via birth control, rather than invitro fertilization, and that’s assuming that a woman would only require one attempt (typically, three attempts are required to induce pregnancy).

The dollars and cents don’t add up in the case of potentially infertile women as a result of no birth control. Though Planned Parenthood offers birth control to poor women at reduced rates, there is still no recourse for women who resent their placement, firmly beneath Viagra users on the totem of importance.