nm
Are you saying that condoms aren’t safe, or that they aren’t affordable? If that’s the case, why does Planned Parenthood give away so many of them?
Regards,
Shodan
Is that your suggested method of birth control?
Only in Nebraska.
Regards,
Shodan
I’m saying that an IUD is much more affordable for people who are moderately sexually active, and also much more reliable than “always use condoms” for many people.
Condoms are great, especially if you also need protection from STIs, but IUDs are better birth control for most people in stable relationships.
No, it’s not. Condoms are ineffective.
Last year, huh? “Nice team spirit, Morty.” Congress can pass all kinds of lip-service laws. Doesn’t mean it gets the job done.
Tell it to Planned Parenthood.
Regards,
Shodan
Why would I do that? They already have information on the best methods of preventing pregnancies… and condoms are not among them.
Next time, a little more research.
Expectorations,
CaptMurdock
85% effective, coupled with the note “if you use condoms perfectly every single time you have sex, they’re 98% effective at preventing pregnancy” does not equal ineffective.
You should have your ducks in a row if you’re going to be snarky.
It should read 100% effective if used perfectly every time, because the perfect way to use them is to chuck them on the floor and whack off.
Outercourse is [del]everything[/del] [even] more effective than condoms, and it’s free, and you don’t need to go anywhere to use it. But like condoms, you have to be mindfully consistent in using it, and some people don’t like it as much as other options.
There are better methods. Better because you don’t need to be actively mindful, better because they don’t interfere with the act. But they require going to a medical practitioner.
I think it is perfectly reasonable to not have sex as a woman when there’s a law on the books that makes sex somewhat dangerous for women, and citing that law as to why you consider sex too dangerous.
Using sex as a way to pressure men is gross and relies on terrible gender norms.
Her message had hints of both, and I’m not particularly interested in reading the tea leaves to determine which Alyssa meant.
Is she still playing “Whose the Boss?” (shitty show even for a kid)
“Well, I have very little talent, so I’ll say something they’ll talk about online”
But in this case, you’re boycotting the thing you have an issue with. You didn’t stop eating nutella because Trump wants to buid a wall. The equivalent would be to stop having sex with your partner because you don’t like his behavior in bed.
Once again, in these cases, you’re denying yourself because you don’t want to support/to participate in these things. And by the way, I’d an issue also with cutting off the partner you disagree with. Sex isn’t a bargaining chip.
[/quote]
Boycotts have worked in several cases, by the way. Despite the generally favorable press Chick-fil-A got when it was boycotted, the company has mostly moved it’s charity to less political causes. Similarly, Barilla pasta apologized for their statements that were deemed anti-gay. And the US veal market has moved from individually caging the animals to letting them mingle in small pens. I am happy to buy from both Chick-fil-a and Barilla. Both remain conservative companies, but neither crosses the threshold (for me) into “doing stuff that actively troubles me.” I’m reconsidering veal, too.
[/QUOTE]
I’m sure it might work, but I suspect that if, say, gays had stopped having sex to protest against Barilla, it wouldn’t have been very effective.
Well, I’ve certainly learned my lesson from this! In the future, when discussing republican attitudes towards issues, I won’t bring up major talking points of the most popular republican pundits and kingmakers. Because using them as an indication of where the party as a whole is is just fucking crazy talk, apparently. I’m so sorry for this embarrassing misstep, and in the future will abstain from generalizing about a political party based on statements from its most influential pundits, its federal elected officials, its supreme court nominees, and its fucking president. I’ll instead go off the platonic republican idea, who would never shame a woman for having sex and really thinks states rights isn’t about racism.
Maybe I’m being unfairly harsh on Claire. After all, she’s French, she may not have quite the best view of American politics. In that case, Claire, I realize that it may be hard to believe, coming from a country where politics is not fundamentally broken, but the modern republican party absolutely is cartoonishly fucking evil. They are that bad and worse, a fundamentally immoral force in American politics.
PP gives condoms away because they are cheap and reasonably effective. They don’t give IUDs away because they are not at all cheap and are a medical device that requires a medical practitioner to install them and medical followups to make sure they’re still where they’re supposed to be and not causing problems.
But in this case, you’re boycotting the thing you have an issue with. You didn’t stop eating nutella because Trump wants to buid a wall. The equivalent to your veal boycott would be to stop having sex with your partner because you don’t like his behavior in bed.
Once again, in these cases, you’re denying yourself because you don’t want to support/to participate in these things. And by the way, I’d an issue also with cutting off the partner you disagree with. Sex isn’t a bargaining chip.
I’m sure it might work, but I suspect that if, say, gays had stopped having sex to protest against Barilla, it wouldn’t have been very effective.
Girls under age 18 would be afraid of telling their parents, especially if those parents are firmly opposed to abortion. They would ask for an abortion too late having avoided telling for too long, or they would be pressured by their parents to keep the baby (or, in fact, the contrary. I know a woman who made her daughter abort against her will), or they would end up giving birth secretely and throwing the baby in a garbage can.
Parents don’t have a need to know, and I fail to see what problem telling the parents would solve. If they have a good relationship with their daughter, presumably, she will tell them (and in fact, the worst the parents, the more likely that the daughter won’t want to tell them. Informing parents will generally benefit the worst of them).
If it’s presented as a typical behavior, I want it to actually be a typical behavior. “Conservatives just hate women and think they’re all sluts” isn’t an objective statement. It’s propaganda. Bad propaganda.
Many of them are opposed to contraception too. Why would they do that?
They’re opposed to abortion, and see it as, morally, equivalent to murder. Why would they want to facilitate abortion?
So, unless someone agrees with you about everything wrt what is best for society, they hate children and think women are sluts?
And this, according to you, ins’t a caricature? You actually think that 50% or so of your fellow citizens just enjoy seeing people suffer? That when they go to vote, they wonder “which candidate will make people suffer more?”
I suppose one might think so if one didn’t understand what Planned Parenthood actually do. I mean, if Planned Parenthood actively promoted everyone getting an abortion and blocked any attempt anywhere to even make abortions marginally safer and only paid minor lip service to the whole “family planning” thing, then a comparison to the NRA might be more appropriate.
But in opposing it, they are taking action that will result in vastly larger numbers of unwanted pregnancies and vastly larger numbers of abortions, many of which will be unsafe. But as I said, it’s certainly the best course of action if what you want is for women to suffer while you get to feel smug and self-righteous.
So I can assume you’re fine with false advertising, disseminating lies about the medical effects of abortion and deliberately emotionally traumatizing poor pregnant women? I guess the end justifies the means.
I’m not rehashing a debate we’ve had many times before; suffice it to say that your representation of the evidence is extremely skewed.
Again, I’m not treating them as cartoon strawmen. I am reporting on things they are actually saying and doing. If you feel that this makes them look like cartoon villains, perhaps you should consider why that is.