Who cares that she's not even old enough to buy a pack of cigarettes legally? Get her drunk on wine coolers, get what you want, then the next morning, take her to CVS to get Plan B and make sure there's no chance the slut will show up in a few months talking child support payments and DNA tests.
So guys, if you screw a 17-year-old and "forget" to use a condom, remember: Nothing says "thanks a lot, you cheap whore" like the gift of Plan B!
UPDATE: Linked at Mahablog and Pandagon, both of whom ascribe my comments to mental pathology. OK, let's unpack that, shall we?
First, I am anecdotally acquainted with specific examples of how guys are using Plan B in exactly the way described: "Hey, I don't have to use a condom! Just take her to the CVS in the morning and dose her with the 'morning-after pill,' and I'm off the hook!" And their partners feel demeaned by this treatment: "Wow, he really doesn't want to risk a permanent commitment with me, does he?"
Mahablog particularly repeats the lie -- and it's not the first time -- that my comments about the FLDS cult in Texas were intended as an endorsement of their polygamous practices. Rather, I was pointing out the abusive overreach of the Texas officials, who mounted a SWAT raid and put all of the FLDS children in custody, even tiny infants. And I was also pointing out the hypocritical double standard involved, since the putative object of the raid was to prevent teenage motherhood, even while Texas led the nation in teenage pregnancy: "If they're going to stage a paramilitary raid every time a 15-year-old gets pregnant in Texas, they're going to need to hire a lot more SWAT officers."
Finally, and I know this will produce gasps of astonishment from you feminists: Men and women are not "equal," in the sense of being identical and therefore fungible. The sexes are different in ways that are socially important, and only a radical egalitarian fanatic would argue otherwise.
Thus, the idiot commenter who accuses me of denying women's "agency" in sexual activity has ludicrously missed the mark. I don't for a moment deny that women voluntarily choose to have sex; what I deny is that their motives and reasons for doing so are, in general, the same as men's motives and reasons.
The academic/political/legal forces that would compel us to pretend that men and women are identical are engaged in denial of truths that are obvious to any stand-up comedian. C'mon, people: How many thousands of stand-up routines have been built upon observing the differences between men and women? And we laugh because these observations are true.
Yes, men do tend to fetishize power tools and other grown-up "toys." Yes, women are kind of crazy about shoes. Yes, men do tend to go into a store, find exactly what they want and buy it, while women tend to linger in the mall for hours "just looking." Men and women are different, and even if you don't exactly fit the gender-role stereotype, the general differences are observable and funny as hell when Jerry Seinfeld or Jeff Foxworthy points them out.
Gender differences even hold true among homosexuals, as Andrew Sullivan once pointed out by repeating this joke:
Q. What does a lesbian bring on her second date?Which is to say, the female tendency toward domesticity -- the preference for long-term relationships -- persists even in the otherwise anti-traditional world of lesbianism, and the male tendency toward promiscuity is even more marked among gay men, who don't have women to say "no" to them.
A. A U-Haul trailer.
Q. What does a gay man bring on a second date?
A. What's a second date?
In general, among heterosexual singles, men and women approach the mating ritual with different objectives. The fact that more women nowadays play the role of sexual aggressors cannot be denied, but is an understandable response to decades of egalitarian dogma pumped into the culture. Despite this shift, it is nevertheless still true that women generally date in search of a long-term committed relationship, while men (especially successful, attractive men) are more generally content to "play the field."
It is only the feminist ideologue -- with her androgynous insistence that all things must be equal -- who considers it "empowering" for women to imitate male behavior in the dating game. Men and women are different, and this "pro-sex feminist" strategy of empowerment through promiscuity ultimately disadvantages all women.
But don't let me trouble you with these quibbles, you egalitarian fanatics. Stay comfortable inside your ideological bubble, viewing me as a boorish right-wing misogynist, and employing your Adorno/Hofstadter thesis that all conservatives are repressed mental cases to dismiss any evidence or argument that might contradict your worldview. And when you start reading crime stories about teenage girls being abused by men who use Plan B as part of their exploitation strategies, interpret that data through your narrow prism, ignoring the possibility that you just might be wrong about some things.
UPDATE II: Wow, my third Malkin Award nomination since February! I'd like to thank the Academy . . .
UPDATE III: After commenters are done excoriating me as a "clueless douchebag," they might want to check out Monique Stuart's take on this:
The beauty of a prescription being required is that it might actually involve some parental guidance. That is why this judge is against it. They want to detach children from their parents' social mores.Right. We're just breeder units, producing taxpayer-drones for The State.
The drug companies are also involved. They want to make money, and they'll be making a lot more of it if all of this would become over the counter. . . . This is about the companies that produce these drugs opening themselves up to a wider market. It's disgusting.
Anyway, parents just lost some more of their rights. The government, primarily through the courts, have told parents time and again that they have no business in their childrens' lives.
UPDATE IV: "Do her. Dose her. Ditch her." Really, Jimmie, I think the Bar Kays said it best:
Hit and run,How is it that being an easy pushover for a selfish user is now regarded as "liberation," and anyone who tries to wise you up by pointing out the simple facts of the game is a misogynist oppressor?
You played your game so well,
You really made it hard to tell
That all you planned
Was a one-night stand.
As Jake Gittes says in Chinatown:
ReplyDeleteYou're dumber than you think I think you are.
Yeah!
ReplyDeleteYou know, she wanted that baby and after not giving her the decision to drink the wine coolers or the "selfish pleasure" (which apparently only men in your world enjoy sex....can't say that surprises me), you then force her to take the pill!
The world would be a lot better place if we just had more illegitimate children to mother who cannot take care of them. Thanks for the insight
Two thoughts for you:
ReplyDelete1. Women have sex for their own reasons. Even seventeen-year-old women.
2. Women also choose to take contraception -- including emergency contraception -- for their own reasons. Even seventeen-year-old women.
There is no reason whatsoever to deny a sexually active seventeen year old what a sexually active eighteen year old can purchase without controversy. You do know that women have agency, sexual and otherwise, of their own, don't you?
With all due respect, my generation is having sex. Simple fact is I knew more about sex at 14 then I'm sure my parents did.
ReplyDeleteHyperbole is not an answer to anything, and quite frankly sounding hysterical only makes people take you less seriously.
Underage kids are having sex, period. I've seen adult attempts to curb it, and quite frankly they just border on pathetic. No offense to folks but we need to deal with reality.
Wow, nearly speechless. Get her drunk so you can rape her and she's the bad guy? Now I understand why you're so angry.
ReplyDeleteToo late for that cheap whore Bristol Palin.
ReplyDeleteHeh. There's nothing better than a funny, over the top post except if its followed by numerous outraged comments from moonbats.
ReplyDeleteDude your own pathalogical hang-ups are showing. Pull up your pants. Rape? Whores?
ReplyDeleteI suggest you seek help for your deep seated problems concerning female sexuality.
Another man wanting to control women. What a maroon.
An ill wind of anger? Nay, guilt flows through the sounding chamber of Goodfellow McCain's notice.
ReplyDelete(It's talk like Shakespeare today)
Yes, because it's all about memememememe. Fuck that poor baby in the womb who is just the unfortunate accident of behaving like an immature slut - and yes, that term applies to both the boy and the girl.
ReplyDeleteAnd I do so love the "we're going to do it anyway" argument. Ahh, the sweet sound of generation narcissus and their complete rejection of any objective moral value system. It just warms the cockles of one's hearts to hear such a stirring defense of humanity. It's good to know we have so abased ourselves that we are completely unable to stifle any of our basest urges because, as indicated by the nimrods who have posted thus far, human beings are mere automatons whose sole purpose is to gratify every urge at all times.
And yes, let's celebrate a society that slaps all sorts of parental notifications upon anything that might have even the remotest deleterious affect upon a minor, but handing out abortion-inducing drugs like they are candy? What, me worry?
Sorry, one more thing. The moonbats are too stupid and too steeped into the mindless banter about woman's liberation to understand that the opponents of this crap are the ones who are actually more interested in defending the inherent dignity of women. Do you believe that the ready availability of contraception and abortion has helped women? It's done quite the opposite in fact, as it feeds into the notion that women should be treated as little more than sperm deposits. So, yeah, it's good of you to pretend to give a damned about women and to yammer about "Freeeeeeedom!" like you're all Mel Gibson in Braveheart, but the fact of the matter is that you have done more damage to women than any of the supposed misogynistic Neanderthals you're all bitching about,.
ReplyDelete1. Women have sex for their own reasons. Even seventeen-year-old women.
ReplyDeleteThey want their BF's to like them and not leave them for the other chick who will.
Either that or they are the super disturbed chicks who end up in the strip clubs. The girls who has been abused someway when she was younger and is looking for attention and affection from her substitute father figure.
The only way she can do that is through sex.
This is classic satire--I think. It displays some of the usual problems satire generates, such as, who is the target? I'm guessing it's a) the FDA for approving the drug and b) young men who only want to fuck without bothering to establish any sort of real social or emotional connection.
ReplyDeleteJonathon Swift you are not! But nice try.
Is this how your evenings with 17 year-old usually end?
ReplyDeleteA little TMI for the blogosphere, eh?
Like the line from the movie City Slickers.
ReplyDeleteWomen need a reason to have sex.
Men need a place.
how difficult is that to figure out?
Sheesh, it's satire people, and the author is putting in writing thinking I've heard from young males many times in my life. He is also warning young women that the cute and oh-so-persistent boyfriend who keeps nagging you to give in probably won't respect you, and sure as hell won't love you, in the morning. So, young ladies might want to wait for something more commital than wine coolers and an air mattress in the bed of an El Camino before giving in.
ReplyDeleteI so love the bitter, brittle rigidity of Pandagon readers....it'd be funny if it wasn't just so darned pathetic!
CrankyCon...
ReplyDeleteWow another male telling me what has and hasn't helped women through the years.
I really want to know what makes you so well informed on what is good for us lil' old women.
Quick - somebody get CrankyCon some smelling salts. Teenagers are indulging their basest instincts. Lordy - they might talk back to their parents next!
ReplyDeleteWhat an idiotic post... no wonder republicans are becoming entirely irrelevant. They're PSYCHO.
ReplyDeleteWhat a moron. Seriously.
ReplyDeleteNothing about this post wouldn't equally apply to any other form of contraception.
ReplyDeleteAnd your comments about innate differences between men and women is a non sequitor. Women - in fact, people - are much more complex than your ludicrously simplistic assessment.
Nothing about this post wouldn't equally apply to any other form of contraception.
ReplyDeleteAnd your comments about innate differences between men and women is a non sequitor. Women - in fact, people - are much more complex than your ludicrously simplistic assessment.
How retarded. The question is not whether teenagers respond to their basic instincts, the question is "what do you do about it?"
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly do you think happens when you pat them on the back and say "oh, it's ok, everybody does it, we understand. Here, have some free condoms... and your parents don't need to know about this because THEY might JUDGE you or try to STOP you or something."
Do you nutbars honestly think that is going to have NO effect on the frequency and severity of future behavior???
Next time you get mugged, tell the mugger you won't report him and give him your home address. Obviously he's going to rob you anyway, so he might as well do it with your approval and facilitation right?
UPDATE II: Wow, my third Malkin Award nomination since February! I'd like to thank the Academy . . .
ReplyDeletemust be pissing off the right people
I don't know if being a clueless douchebag is actually a mental pathology.
ReplyDeleteNothing about this post wouldn't equally apply to any other form of contraception. Sooo . . . what's your point?
ReplyDeleteWow--okay. I'm a feminist who certainly understands that men and women are different. Of course we are, that's just not the point of the outrage being directed at this post.
ReplyDeleteThe point is that contraception beign made available to 17 year old women who want it is NOT EVEN REMOTELY the same as your notion of "over the counter roofies." Your example takes the woman's wants, needs, and ability to think for herself completely out of the equation.
As for you, CrankyCon:
"Do you believe that the ready availability of contraception and abortion has helped women?"
First off, YES. Secondly, I hardly need you deciding what's best for me or how best to shield me. Your idea that contraception has turned women into litter more than "sperm deposits" (classy!) is actually more insulting to men, in my opinion, than women. The notion that men are nothing but sex-crazed beasts who are only held back from ravishing any woman in sight by the fear of potential pregnancy or disease is just as sexist as claiming women can't think for themselves when it comes to sex. We like it, okay? Get over it.
Sometimes stupidity is just so astonishing it simply takes your breath away. Sort of O'Reilly-esque - so piercingly, brilliantly stupid, it forces one to just stop dead in one's tracks, and contemplate its magnificent dumb-ness. Thank you. You've made my day.
ReplyDeleteHope you read this before you delete it.
ReplyDeleteYou're a bigger ass than Hitler, okay?
I'm just going to pray that you never have a daughter. You are absolutely clueless.
ReplyDeleteIf your argument is that too many men in this country make babies and then make tracks, I agree.
ReplyDeleteIf your argument is that too many men in this country have no respect for women and will do anything, including pump them full of booze and drugs, to have sex, I agree.
If your argument is that protection (i.e. condoms) should be mandatory for sex between two people unless those people are (a) married, (b) want to get in the Parent Business, and (c) have the marital and financial strength and commitment to get into the Parent Business, I agree.
If your argument is that 17-year-old kids, let's call them Bristols and Levis, would be better off postponing intercourse until the Bristols and Levis have aged a bit and matured even more, I agree.
If your argument is some sort of Maggie Gallagher screed that abortion is evil and sex is Satan in his/her/its purest form, I disagree.
Spell things out a bit.
P.S. I found your Malkin, at face value, to be perhaps the most un-Michelle comment I've ever seen land Andy's honor. Then again, I don't know you and your work well.
P.S.S. Sorry, no google account. I've got enough passwords to remember.
Name is Mark.
Take a chill pill RSM! All of this stuff is good and fun for the majority of us who think you're just a silly crank, but as the conservative contingent continues to get smaller and smaller you'll increasingly become viewed as representative of the movement. Hence more attention for you to the detriment of those who might not have sexual hangups and odd ball religious views, and merely want a slightly less liberal/progressive govt. If the wackiness persists and we're viewed as the party of torture, gay bashing, and bizarre anti-contraception/anti-science Jesus nuts (including wayward 7th Day Freaks), as 2010 gets closer we're gonna get creamed at the polls!
ReplyDeleteYou are aware that a condom can break right? Of course you are. Just like I'm aware that your post is just a tired exercise in ass-hubris.
ReplyDelete"Do you believe that the ready availability of contraception and abortion has helped women?"
ReplyDeleteFirst off, YES. Well, that just kind of makes you ignorant of most historical developments from the past 40 years.
The notion that men are nothing but sex-crazed beasts who are only held back from ravishing any woman in sight by the fear of potential pregnancy or disease is just as sexist as claiming women can't think for themselves when it comes to sex.The problems with leftists is they don't do subtlety. They don't understand that the objection to the contraceptive culture is not simply that it flips some switch in the male brain to turn him into some sort of sex-crazed maniac. Obviously the world doesn't work quite that way. The problem with junk like this legislation is that it just re-inforces the idea that sex is an inconsequential act, and that men really should not have to think more than two steps beyond what happens when they take a woman to bed.
BTW, you don't have to have a google id in order to leave your name. You people can't even grasp the amazing complexities of "name/URL," and yet we're supposed to listen to your enlightened rants about human sexuality. Whatever.
One of the single most misogynistic, self-aggrandizing, utterly stupid and useless comments on any public policy I have ever read. And the fact that the author, whose name I hope to have already forgotten, attempts to defend it after relfection proves not stupidity but an evil and immoral pride in male dominance over female.
ReplyDeleteQuote: "I'm just going to pray that you never have a daughter. You are absolutely clueless."
ReplyDeleteHis 19-year-old-not-knocked-up-well-adjusted-daughter-who-never-needed-an-abortion is working her way through college like a responsible member of civil society. Sorry if that contradicts your fantasy land worldview.
Quote: "Hope you read this before you delete it. You're a bigger ass than Hitler, okay?"
Why would he delete something which actually demonstrates who is really a bigger ass than Hitler? Q.E.D.
The "Anonymous" pushers of Free Sex (for men) are obtuse.
ReplyDeleteFor only those who actually respect women are concerned that women respect themselves.Too complex for some minds, I know..
If it makes you feel any better Lipless, I don't take you any less seriously after reading this than I ever have. Keep bringing the stupid, old man.
ReplyDeleteI may have to hit the tip jar for this one. Just kidding, of course. Do people actually do that?
Caveat: haven't followed the above discussion, but just wanted to point out something that you seem to be missing:
ReplyDeleteWOMEN. ARE. PEOPLE. As in, thinking people. People able to consent to something. Like not using a condom. Or getting an emergency contraceptive drug.
I am appalled and astonished, actually, at your complete removal of women as decision makers from your post. And, despite your attempt to excoriate those terrible feminists who talk about equality, you're really missing the point. The reasons why the two participants in a given sexual encounter chose to do this don't matter. (I'm assuming you're not against Plan B in cases of rape, right? Because you realize a rapist risks a lot more than just child support payments, right?) The fact, is, one way or another, they decide they want to sleep together.
At this point, they have options. The woman has to decide what level of protection (none being an option) she is willing to put up with; so does the guy. If they don't reach an agreement, there's either no sex or rape.
So unless you can show some statistics (sorry - anecdotes from your friends don't count) supporting that women prefer going to a pharmacy the next day over making their partner use a condom, this is a bunch of B.S.
Not to mention that it shouts loud and clear that you're a despicable prick.
What pisses me off is that people like Pandagon are now going to sell the 18 and now 17 year olds of America to dosing their bodies with nasty chemicals any time they feel compelled to screw some guy is "responsible."
ReplyDeleteI was that "responsible" when I was 19, when emergency contraception was just taking 4-8 birth control pills at once (which is just what plan B is anyway). All it got me was a trip to urgent care, because when you put that NASTY CRAP IN YOUR BODY, most people have some kind of reaction. Including, in my case, 20 hours of vomiting so bad I needed IV hydration. So thanks for that, Planned Parenthood. And since I did get so sick, I had to tell my mom anyway, so EPIC FAIL on "EC" right there.
I'm SO GLAD my daughter will have the chance to be that responsible one day, especially when she's still a minor.
Actually, nothing says "thanks a lot, you cheap whore" like just giving it to her anal. This seems to be occurring a lot among teens these days as a means of contraception or maintaining so-called "technical" virginity.
ReplyDeleteI am curious about RSM's anecdotal evidence. Are there really guys who think that one night sans condom is worth an awkward trip to CVS the next day and $30-$40? I find this dubious.
ReplyDeleteWOMEN. ARE. PEOPLE. Holy crap! We hadn't thought of that! Thanks for pointing that out to us. And in all caps too.
ReplyDelete"What's next? Over-the-counter roofies?"
ReplyDeleteObama's probably going to make states pass out candy canes to pedophiles.
. Are there really guys who think that one night sans condom is worth an awkward trip to CVS the next day and $30-$40? I find this dubious.You realize that the awkward trip to the abortion clinic & the $250 charge has happened a few times, right?
ReplyDeleteBTW, you don't have to have a google id in order to leave your name. You people can't even grasp the amazing complexities of "name/URL," and yet we're supposed to listen to your enlightened rants about human sexuality. Whatever.
ReplyDeleteThu Apr 23, 03:56:00 PM
Cranky,
I had to get going and missed the Name/URL option. Thanks for pointing it out.
Next time, trying doing so without mocking another individual. Contrary to what you've been taught and/or believe, it really is possible to pointing out a mistake to someone without being Grover Nordquist with the cameras on. Try it sometime. You just may like it.
This post is a rich vein of pure stupidity embedded in a mountain of misogyny. What -is- it with conservatives being so immensely repressed? You guys know it makes you horrifically damaged people, right? I mean...right?
ReplyDeleteLook, for being a 'reality-based movement,' you guys have a hell of a hard time dealing with the real world. If you want to reduce the rate of unwanted pregnancies by encouraging teens and singles to have less sex then go right ahead and try. (I think we've all seen how well -that's- been working so far.) I just don't understand why you want to punish people who go ahead and have sex anyways. It's not an either/or sort of a problem, guys. You can (and most sex ed programs do) promote abstinence until adulthood -and- provide information about and access to contraceptives.
Wow.
ReplyDeleteYou are an idiot.
"If you want to reduce the rate of unwanted pregnancies by encouraging teens and singles to have less sex then go right ahead and try. (I think we've all seen how well -that's- been working so far.) "
ReplyDeleteTherein lies the true denial of reality. They expect us to convince people to eat less pecan pie while they're pushing free liposuction for anyone who wants to eat as much pie as they want guilt-free. Then they mock us that our efforts to decrease the number of annual nut-allergy related deaths has been ineffective. THE REASON IS YOU.
"I just don't understand why you want to punish people who go ahead and have sex anyways."
Captain Obvious wields a Mighty Cluebat:
INCENTIVES ALWAYS LEAD TO MORE, DISINCENTIVES ALWAYS LEAD TO LESS.
Oh, and "punish" is not the word. It's about accepting responsibility, especially deferred responsibility that should have been taken years ago. When you get a happy-meal, you are not "punished" for $4.00 just because you were used to mommy paying for it until you were 18. Most people, when allowed to see the REAL cost/value relationship from which they had been artificially shielded, tend to stop buying happy-meals.
How many thousands of stand-up routines have been built upon observing the differences between men and women? And we laugh because these observations are true.Right. That's why, whenever I'm looking for an explanation of how species evolved or why gender roles exist, or explanations for other observed phenomena, I always start by asking Jeff Foxworthy. Because, you know, what Jeff says is just true.
ReplyDeleteMr. McCain, I'm beginning to think of you, or people with your mindset anyway, as "The Perfect Conservative". Sort of like the intellectual equivalent of Patient Zero -- the place where the infection got started.
I would like to agree with the anonymous poster from Thu Apr 23, 06:56:00 PM (Ketsuri had a really good post too.)
ReplyDeleteAs a young woman who's been on birth control since I was 17, and who has had to take Plan B once due to a broken condom, it's about taking responsibility and having options in having control over my own body.
It's also about privacy. I never came out and told my parents that I was sexually active, or that I've taken Plan B, and I've paid for everything out of my own pocket. Whether you want to admit it or not, there are people who get into situations where it is an emergency and the woman needs access to Plan B asap, without having to wait to get a prescription beforehand. That defeats the purpose of Plan B if there is a wait involved.
If you're worried about guys and girls using it as birth control due to stupidity and irresponsibility on one or both person's part, then you need to improve education about the drug, what its proper use it, and so on. Denying access just makes the situation worse.
Also, on a final note, you guys are slow. I live in BC, Canada, and Plan B has been available without a prescription for about a year I think, or somewhere around there.
Captain Oblivious:
ReplyDeleteNice one, just up there--notice how he did that? Claimed that something...some mysterious something--was "incentivizing" sex, or disincentivizing abstinence. Then, in the all-caps he mocked just a couple posts before, he reminds us that incentives increase stuff, and verse-vica. Oh, very nice.
Nice, but wrong--wrong unto stupid. First, there is no program except in your withered mind that encourages or 'pushes' sex for young people. There is no such thing; it's O'Reillyesque hyperbole, or what used to be hyperbole but is now, apparently, the RNC platform.
That's because the incentive is in the hormones, the very DNA. The incentive, you dork, is HORNINESS. It's wired in. You can only disincentivize sex with fear and with information. What the poster was saying--and what 25 years of teaching in high school has confirmed for me and everybody I know, even republicans--is that the jacklegged, misty-eyed abstinence clowns do great harm. If you don't believe that, read some science about the programs. Their only success is to give right-wing morons something to be proud of. Real people, real kids, are served so badly by these programs that it is a crime. In fact, to put it in terms you might get, such programs are responsible for vast numbers of...it horrors me to say it...ABORTIONS. You have participated jollily in a program to keep millions of horny young people stupid (speaking of clue-bats) about their own bodies. And you do it ON IMPULSE, apparently having forgotten the ancient days when your own withered grapes still sent signals to your amygdala.
I wish it were just stupidity. Stupidity would be sad, but forgivable. It's not; it's one more salvo in the ancient Parade of Prudes.
By the way, that well-adjusted, never-had-an-abortion daughter? (you brought her up, jack.) She's told you approximately 30% of what really has happened to her. Your understanding that she is well-adjusted--which I'd guess is important to not her but your self-image--is the very reason she needs access to contraception. Because if she's well adjusted, she's a horny little minx. So it's curious to me why you'd attribute such vile intent to my well-adjusted son, and such radiant purity to your daughter? Project much?
ice
oh, and as for your login advice, pish. We're all just abstaining.
Switching Cluebat to Subtle Mode.
ReplyDeleteThe disincentives to sex, as I clearely stated before, are not "punishments" but responsibilities and consequences.
By undermining the certainty of responsibility and consequence, you remove the disincentive. Incentive - Disincentive = Total Incentive.
Unlike yourself, I do not have suffer from multiple personality disorder. I did not "mock all caps." His daughter is not my daughter. I never mentioned anything about logins.
First there IS something called YOUR wrong-unto-stupid withered mind which incentivises sex. You admit it as such even in your very next paragraph. That it must be some "program" is purely your own fabrication.
There is no "suicide incentive program" in the U.S. Do you contend that because of a lack of this program, if we discontinued suicide-prevention hotlines there would be no increase in suicides? Yet this is exactly what you accomplish by removing and undermining disincentives, even when incentives remain unchanged.
The problem is not abstinance, the problem is the mixed message that abstinance opponents always provide which sabotage any progress. THE REASON IS YOU.
"Don't have sex ... but if you do it anyway, we won't judge you, it'll be awesome, your parents don't have to know, there will be no repercussions, and we'll even give you free contraceptives and SUBSIDIZED health exams so you don't break the piggy bank!"
This is really simple cause and effect. It's not rocket science. you can continue to act indignantly "gosh, wish we knew where all these new teenage pregnancies came from" but the answer is staring you in the mirror.
You want real science? How about The Harvard School of Public Health AIDS Prevention Research Project? Their studies show that free condoms in Africa, which are 90% effective at stoping the spread of HIV have *gasp* incentivised a non-monogomous and promiscuous culture. Gee, how could that have happened? Promiscuity (now subsidized) has increased, not surprisingly, 10-fold. Do the math... 1/10 transmission rate... 10X sexual encounters... Gosh that makes it about the same right? WRONG! Because AIDS transmission also depends on the frequency of carriers. As carriers increase geometrically by transmission, future probability of infection increases exponentially. Yes that's right, MORE people were infected with AIDS in Africa because of the "free condoms, no consequences" educational programs than would have been without them. What educators beyond high school are convinced of, is that the jacklegged, misty-eyed promiscuity clowns do great harm.
"And you do it ON IMPULSE"
Project much yourself? Getting impulses is one big step removed from doing them. Some people prefer to think of the consequences before acting. I know it's a lot to ask, but try it sometime. Especially if you're going to be around high-school kids. Maybe teach a few of them to try it also.
It is your failure as an educator to teach kids about their bodies without encouraging or condoning sex, as you seem too incompetent to seperate the two.
Look up to the post... the girl says she needed plan B, because condoms didn't work and she needed her privacy? Look at that. She admits if her parents had known what she was up to, she might not have chosen to be up to it! If she had been forced to deal with the consequences of her own choices, she might have chosen *gasp* abstinance. That would have been just horrible now wouldn't it. And if not being old enough somehow excuses her from the consequences, then her parents are rightly entitled to have some influence on that choice, whether she likes that idea or not.
Now multiply this scneario 100 fold, and educate every kid, boy and girl: "This is how your bodies work. When you become an adult, you will get to decide what to do about it on your own. Until then, your parents are entitled to know. And then and now, there are serious consequences, both physical and social. No, we won't give you any free supplies and hide it from your parents." You seem to think this would be "ineffective" and you're only right because idiots like you spout contradiction and the poor kids are understandably confused.
Consistency is the only way to teach. You know this.
It's really hard to teach kids the earth is round when you flat-earthers keep trolling-around handing out "free" candy... and then mock us for not being able to keep their attention span... and then you wonder aimlessly why so many kids get rotten teeth and can't find Canada on a map.
"Your daughter does blah blah blah and hides things from you and is a minx and I'd guess blah blah blah. Project much?" Seeing as I don't have a daughter, Yes, you obviously do.
I'm glad your son is your definition of well-adjusted (since you brought him up, jack), which is to say he ignores you and doesn't tell you jack. It probably means he has a shot at turning out well despite you.
"The fact that more women nowadays play the role of sexual aggressors cannot be denied, "
ReplyDeleteWhere are these women other than on television? Thanks for nothing.
"Anonymous said...
ReplyDeleteWith all due respect, my generation is having sex. Simple fact is I knew more about sex at 14 then I'm sure my parents did."
How old are you now (2009)? 80? 90? Otherwise, you've overestimated yourself.
Can we get some links for you claims about africa captain.
ReplyDeleteThis is probably the biggest, steamiest pile of crap I've ever had the displeasure of looking upon.
ReplyDeleteWhat I'm gathering from this is that the writer believes adult men now have a free pass to sleep with underage girls, because 17 year olds can get emergency contraceptives.
Here's a shocker for you: Adult men can obtain emergency contraceptives THEMSELVES! You don't have to be a female to walk into a pharmacy and walk out with Plan B.
To the poster who compared Plan B to taking a handful of birth control pills: Plan B is a high dose of levenorgestrel, a synthetic progestagen found in SOME birth control pills (though in a much, much lower dose - you'd actually have to take about 30 birth control pills containing levenorgestrel to equal the dose that's in Plan B...).
Awesome..
ReplyDeleteSo I slip her the pill in her drink the same time I give her the roofie..
I'm home free.
why must you demonize men with your heavy handed generalizations?
ReplyDelete@CrankyCon
ReplyDeleteAre you serious?
Are you actually suggesting that the only way to have a happy monogamous relationship is to go steady after having sex once?
Are you suggesting that you are showing "respect" to your partner by exposing yourself and them to the risk of disease?
Are you saying that you can't respect a woman after a one night stand? Damn, whatever happened to "two ships passing in the night", what a dull world you must inhabit.
And I thought that the point of condoms was that you weren't depositing sperm on, or in your sexual partner. Maybe I misread the label.
You people remind me of the puritans, if it's fun it must be evil.
Did any of you clowns ever learn basic logic? Too much stupidity in here; can't breathe.
ReplyDeleteWe need to stop calling women who we know sleep around “sluts” and “hoes” to try to impress guys into believing we’re different and just let those women be. An even better point of action to take though, is to make the same comments towards guys that you know sleep around.
ReplyDelete