Fox Hosts mansplain that women should pay more for insurance because of they have “uteri, ovaries and breasts”

On Fox & Friends the hosts, joined by Dr. David Samadi, discussed women’s health care and insurance while inadvertently displaying that there is indeed a War on Women, and Obamacare is far better than relying on insurance companies to do the right thing.

The following dialogue even took Gretchen Carlson aback as the other two mansplain why women should pay higher costs for insurance, because we have those icky uteri, ovaries and breasts.

The funniest part, is when Samadi counters Carlson’s explanation that that “men and women have babies together.”

Samadi says, “Not always.”

Yes Dr. Dummy, always.









The following video probably contains some of the most derpy Brian Kilmeade moments.

Watch courtesy of Media Matters:


In terms even Dr. Samadi can understand: The man sperm meets the future Mommy’s egg after others failed the swimming contest. Only the most badass sperm will meet the egg. The reason the two meet inside the woman’s body is because no precautionary measures were taken for sexy-time, either because they live in a state that does not advocate for sex-ed, and/or birth control, or because they want to have a baby. If a woman takes birth control pills for example, there is no egg to fertilize. The fetus grows inside the womb (not the tummy), then after what seems like a gazillion years, a baby is squeezed out of the vagina.

Boom! There’s your baby which resulted from a man and a woman having sexy time.

Should I use picture cards?

You’re welcome ‘Doctor!’

  • tiredoftea

    The dumbing down of our country continues!

  • BanditBasheert

    Strangely enough this man is a Board Certified Urologist and Chief of Robotic Surgery. As a physician, his views are way out of the mainstream although he apparently has spent many years practicing his speciality on Faux News. I’m not sure if Faux is eligible to award CME’s to physicians because they are paid to go on air and spout their views.

    Previously, Dr. Samadi was a FOX Medical A-Team panelist for “Fox & Friends,” “America’s Newsroom,” “America’s News Headquarters” and “The Live Desk.” Additionally, he also serves as the co-host of The Strategy Room’s “Headline Health.”

    Healthcare is healthcare is healthcare. We have 2 sexes, men and women. Both have health issues related to their sexual organs. Both sexes suffer from cancer (Mr. Samadi mainly treats MALES with prostate cancer).

    The fact is women are more healthcare conscious than a lot of males. Women practice preventative medicine and often are responsible for making sure their children are treated medically as needed. Generally men have to be dragged to physicians.

    Both women and men suffer from many of the same illnesses, diseases and maladies. There is no reason why one sex should pay more than the other. Bad things happen to both sexes. Denying access to women is simply one more thing that minimize women in this political climate.

    He may be a practicing physician, but his ethics are questionable and his bias is showing. He practices in a male oriented specialty (women don’t get prostate cancer). That’s where his money comes from. He took a Hippocratic Oath when he graduated – to “do no harm” and yet he would deny equal opportunity to healthcare for women – or to charge them more which is a backdoor way to deny care.

    The fact that he is the medical face on faux news says volumes – his technique may be good in the OR, but he makes all of his money fixing men’s SEX ORGANS.

    • Andy

      It simply sounds like you have a lot of trouble handling the truth. If woman take more advantage of health care services then they should pay more. This model can be worked out through insurance carriers.

      • abeec

        That is illogical. Using a service more is not a indicator of increased costs. HMOs found that if they endorsed more preventive health care (usage), their costs were decreased in the long run. Under this ‘truth’ if men used medical services more often, than perhaps the savings from decrease catastrophe costs would decrease and negate any perceived ‘unequally’. Healthy people through more visits to the doctor (and preventive behavior) just might lower the costs to all. But I am hypothesizing. Much like the Dr. has done.

  • BanditBasheert

    What are the key statistics about breast cancer in men?
    The American Cancer Society estimates for breast cancer in men in the United States are for 2013:
    About 2,240 new cases of invasive breast cancer will be diagnosed among men
    About 410 men will die from breast cancer

    Guys – it happens. If it happened to you, would you really want to be discriminated against?

  • Guest

    Men have a penis, testicles, and a prostate. A penis can become impotent, testicles can develop cancer and so can the prostate. More evidence that the idiots at Faux news are morons with elephant shit for brains.

    Oh and men can also get breast cancer, you f@#king idiots.

    • BanditBasheert

      Of course they can.
      Men also develop testicular cancer (Lance Armstrong, Scott Hamilton(skater) –

      Our TV’s are constantly informing us that a large number of men apparently suffer from the need to pop a pill to get a hard-on – but not for more than 4 hours!!!
      Cialis, Viagra – all available to men. Do you see women clamoring for this? And all these little MALE happy pills are covered by insurance. Birth Control (gasp) – no way!!!
      Women are already discriminated against – and it’s going to get worse.

      • Andy

        Who is arguing the Cialis and Viagra should be covered by insurance? Not me. Abortions should definitely not be covered. In fact, most minor medical problems should be paid for out of pocket. I don’t pay exorbitant insurance rates so you can run to the doctor every time you get a pimple on your butt.

        • Cosmic_Surfer

          Abortion is a surgical procedure with major risks involved and are a medical necessity for saving a life in many cases but hey, you want to start paying for them, I can send you an address to which you can send thousands of dollars to cover a few

    • rjcarter

      Women give birth more frequently than men get testicular cancer, etc. And if they are insured singly, with moms being a huge part of the work force now, then actuarially (I don’t care if it’s underlined in red, I’m going with it and making actuary an adverb) speaking, they cost the insurance company more. All insurance companies do is crunch numbers and calculate odds. Math isn’t sexist.

      • Kenneth J. Hicks

        Women give birth because men introduce a foreign body into women’s bodies. Men are equally responsible for the condition and its results. Numbers can be crunched, but analysis is still necessary.

        • rjcarter

          Men will be equally responsible for the condition when men have an equal say in the outcome.

          • Cosmic_Surfer

            You can have a say once a child is born but until then – not your vote

          • rjcarter

            Hooray! Then not my premium, either.

          • Cosmic_Surfer

            In a perfect world, if a woman wants to have a kid, it is her choice. You choose to be a part of that process, fine..Now once that kid is born, sorry, you don’t get a pass on responsibility BUT until women are free to exercise the choice without coercion from you, your chosen troglodyte in congress and the rest of the misogynists of the nation playing loose with the rights of self determination, then you need to pay for the consequences of your misogyny. Can’t have it both ways..

            As far as premium, you need to actually look at that scam too. Insurance and lending are the two largest ponzi schemes in the nation

          • rjcarter

            We’re talking about insurance companies covering a candidate who has a higher probability of needing more medical appointments over a candidate who doesn’t, a candidate who wants the same premium despite the higher risks of needing medical care.

            That’s not misogyny. That’s math.

          • BanditBasheert

            Really? When the person who is availing herself of medical care is healthier and lives longer?
            ALL medical care should be free for everyone. Sorry I know your head is going to explode but we need to take the middle man and profits out of people’s health. It is wrong.

          • rjcarter

            Okay, I’ll bite.
            Why should all medical care be free for everyone?

      • Cosmic_Surfer

        Except if they crunch the numbers, coverage for abortion should be a given yet they won’t cover; coverage for birth control should be a given, but the won’t cover, yet every male over the age of 50 will drop testosterone levels and start developing impotence at some level – Viagra they cover

        • rjcarter

          Yep. Already had that argument lo twenty years ago with an insurance provider over birth control pills. They found it was actually cheaper to cover the number of births over the number of people who would be monthly on pills (which I found hard to believe, but maybe in numbers it would add up that way).

          I completely agree on the Viagra front. There’s no way that should be covered.

          • BanditBasheert

            But don’t you see, medical care shouldn’t be used for rationing behavior. No way should insurance companies be making any type of medical decisions. Birth control should be covered (not just pills) as should Viagra and Cialis. The object of medicine is to treat the whole person, not push our own rationale onto someone to regulate their behavior.

          • rjcarter

            I think the difference comes between “improving health” and “improving quality of life” — which aren’t the same thing at all. A man may *want* to feel like he’s twenty again, but be perfectly “healthy” the way he is.

            As to birth control, there’s an argument to be made for the “health” aspect, as it’s often prescribed for actual health improvement reasons (which have to be reinforced to the insurance companies, when those cases arise, to get them to cover it).

            Insurance companies shouldn’t make the medical decision. But they have to be convinced that it *is* a medical decision. I don’t think a case can be made for Viagra/Cialis/HornyGoat along those lines. I think there’s a much better case to be made for birth control, even if there’s not a direct health threat being treated by it, as a preventative of future medical visits of another variety.

    • Cosmic_Surfer

      And almost every male over the age of 50 starts developing an enlarged prostate, testosterone levels drop and heart disease can develop (much higher risk for men than women) and possible urinary issues

  • Cosmic_Surfer

    FOX – perpetuating the War on Women (and on intelligence) as usual

  • rjcarter

    “…either because they live in a state that does not advocate for sex-ed, and/or birth control, or because they want to have a baby.”

    Really? That’s the binary logic? No room for “they made a bad CHOICE not to get a condom,” a device which, I believe, is readily available at any Wal-mart, Walgreens, or grocery store with a pharmacy in all 50 states?

  • Carla Akins

    I want to focus on the fact that the Dr advised that we carry catastrophic coverage, but pay cash/credit card for appointments, scat scans, mammograms etc. Even at cash prices, I wouldn’t be able to go, much less have any testing. I’m not poor, okay I’m poor but fully employed, Granted a big perk is the great health insurance that my employer pays. It allows them to pay me a couple of dollars an hour less than other jobs in my area for the same work. I’m not complaining but if I have pay out of pocket, food or medicine.

    • rjcarter

      Scat scans? Is that the new term for stool sample testing? :)

      • Carla Akins

        haha. I was tired, it was late, spell check didn’t catch it because it was a real word. LMAO. I’m going to leave it…

        • rjcarter

          I avoid picking on typos unless they’re headlines (because, important) but that was just too funny to ignore. :)

          • Carla Akins

            Typos (my own) make me crazy, but you’re right this one is too funny. Freudian perhaps?

  • John Edgewood

    The Dr. is right. We need to take care of ourselves…not have the damn government make our decisions.


    Okay I just have to say, people who are condemning men for using medications like Viagra for “impotence” obviously have no background in medicine. Ready for a shocker? Women now use erectile dysfunction drugs at the same rate that men do. I have been an EMT for years and not only have I seen this in practice but it is also taught as part of the emergency medical technician curriculum. It is taught because we can’t administer Nitroglycerin to people with chest pain if they are on drugs used to treat erectile dysfunction. It is standard practice to ask women if they take them because of its prevalence. Also, the doctor is right, if you use a service more, you should expect to pay more for it.

  • Jack Bone

    The good doctor was correct on all points. What is this stupid site? What, they have 10 users all together

  • Jack Bone

    Freak Out Nation, I can tell this is going to be a liberal slant as they freak out over everything.

  • labman57

    Misogynists such as Samadi should have to pay a higher premium because they have testic … uh, never mind.