Women sue Wal-mart over contraception
Backed by abortion rights groups, three Massachusetts women sued Wal-Mart on Wednesday, accusing the retail giant of violating a state regulation by failing to stock emergency contraception pills in its pharmacies.The lawsuit, filed in state court, seeks to force the company to carry the morning-after pill in its 44 Wal-Marts and four Sam Club stores in Massachusetts.
Right on ladies! Just another reason to not shop at Wal-mart as Broadsheet elaborates...
I realize this has been clear for a while now, but given that Wal-Mart pays women less, promotes women less and cares less about whether women have access to the medical remedies to which they have every right, women -- and men -- should not shop at Wal-Mart anymore.
Nuff said.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Women sue Wal-mart over contraception.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/1756
Weekly Feministing Newsletter
Feministing RSS Feed
I don't reside in the US (Australia), but you mean to say Wal-Mart offer pharmaceutical services i.e. an in house chemist, and choose not to stock this drug ... they ought to have their licence revoked, not just sued ... don't pharmacies have some legal onus to provide full services. What next ... sorry we don't stock insulin.
"should not shop at Wal-Mart anymore." no wonder Vancouver refused them entry. Their modus operandi would seem to be: put small business, out of business then dictate the terms ... I'll never under-estimate the value of a jar of pickles ever again!
This is very dangerous territory, as your very active anti lobby will find someway around these laws (I assume they exist) ... eventually when you least expect it.
Couldn't agree more....
Lets see.
The champion of RFID packaging dosn't offer you want?
Go elsewhere for it! CHANGE THE CHANNEL.
They do it on purpose?
Don't shop there at all!
Don't give them free publicity by dragging their name through the papers either.
Consider supporting the folks that have been a part of your community for years. It may cost a bit more, but the resources stay in your community, with folks that actually have a personal investment there. Protesting with you feet and wallet is FAR more effective, and garners far more integrity, than attaching further legal constraints to free market truisms. I'd like to think that resources available for a grand lawsuit would be better utilised in offering Mal-Wart market competition.
Like "Bleak House", this legal assault, along with the attempt to force healthcare benifits, and the fruitless anti-RFID expenses, will just become another case of "the sniviling and duplicitious lawers get it all"!
DAMN!, I HATE this "strange bedfellows" stuff!