Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How the Birth Control Pill Hurts Boys
gobucks | 29 Oct 2004 | gobucks

Posted on 10/29/2004 7:47:22 AM PDT by gobucks

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last
To: Centurion2000; doug from upland

Many thanks. FR is like a conservative samizdat factory; I love it here.


21 posted on 10/29/2004 9:09:27 AM PDT by gobucks (http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/classics/students/Ribeiro/laocoon.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis
It worked before, when kids were financial assets, being extra hands on the farm. But in today's urban world, where kids have no economic value until they're long out of the nest, it's just not practical. Birth control, love it or hate it, is a modern necessity in our society.

Dd, birth control is not a 'modern necessity'. Birth control pills, do however, create 'modern thinking', like your post, and includs a fascination w/ inappropriate images (and I would argue most of those randy types you refer to are libertarians).

And to imply that the purpose of our kids is that they were 'financial assests' completely misses the point of my article, besides being not true. Kids were an attribute of sex and, usually, marriage, period in those days. The financial asset theory is a convenient hindsight-is-20/20 characterization.

Our kids are necessary for our boys to become Men. (Now, being a brit, chances are very, very, VERY good that you're familiar w/ the Premiership League - maybe you are a Chelsea fan?)

In the UK, I have noticed a dramatic drop in interest regarding anything associated w/ the Anglican Church (well under 1 in 10 Brits even think of going to church much less going each sunday..).

22 posted on 10/29/2004 9:22:23 AM PDT by gobucks (http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/classics/students/Ribeiro/laocoon.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis; gobucks
His point is well taken, though, that the Pill provided the occasion for the divorce between sex and responsibility. There were other factors which could be taken into account: mass media using sex to sell cars and soap, soft porn, and the bogus reports by Alfred Kinsey and Margaret Mead which each contributed significantly.

I don't think the Pill alone would have done it.

23 posted on 10/29/2004 9:24:09 AM PDT by thulldud (It's bad luck to be superstitious.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: thulldud

" I don't think the Pill alone would have done it."

agreed; but given the sheer volume of noise about so many conservative subjects, the silence about the Pill is striking. Yet, as an entry point, it shouldn't be I think.

The Pill is the thin edge of the wedge.


24 posted on 10/29/2004 9:26:51 AM PDT by gobucks (http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/classics/students/Ribeiro/laocoon.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
I told him a woman who doesn't take the Pill is a far more interesting creature to pay attention to ... because ultimately, she is capable of loving him more, by seeking to help him grow up.

Thanks for the info. I'll be sure to tell my wife tonight that 1.) she's not interesting, and 2.) she doesn't love me very much.

25 posted on 10/29/2004 9:32:39 AM PDT by Sloth ("Rather is TV's real-life Ted Baxter, without Baxter's quiet dignity." -- Ann Coulter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis
But in today's urban world, where kids have no economic value until they're long out of the nest, it's just not practical.

Moslems in urban Europe are having large families. If they can do it, why can't we? In fact, if we don't, we're DOOMED.

26 posted on 10/29/2004 9:37:14 AM PDT by Rytwyng (we're here, we're Huguenots, get used to us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
I would argue most of those randy types you refer to are libertarians

Don't confuse strong desire ("randy") with loose behavior. Sometimes religous monogamists have the highest sex drives of all.

27 posted on 10/29/2004 9:39:00 AM PDT by Rytwyng (we're here, we're Huguenots, get used to us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
I would argue most of those randy types you refer to are libertarians

Don't confuse strong desire ("randy") with loose behavior. Sometimes religous monogamists have the highest sex drives of all.

28 posted on 10/29/2004 9:39:16 AM PDT by Rytwyng (we're here, we're Huguenots, get used to us)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis

A kid every nine months?????????? You did not do well in biology????????????? And do you believe pregnant couples no longer have sex??????????


29 posted on 10/29/2004 9:39:36 AM PDT by petitfour
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Sloth
Thanks for the info. I'll be sure to tell my wife tonight that 1.) she's not interesting, and 2.) she doesn't love me very much.

I'm familiar w/ your sarcasm from your previous disagreements with me, so your reply is not interesting and it makes you sound like you are not a grown up.

One wonders 'what you'll be sure' to tell your sons about this 'info'...

30 posted on 10/29/2004 9:39:58 AM PDT by gobucks (http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/classics/students/Ribeiro/laocoon.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Rytwyng

"Sometimes religous monogamists have the highest sex drives of all."

I agree ... but I think he's referring to postings by folks who clearly intend to sound like they are NOT religious monogamists....


31 posted on 10/29/2004 9:41:21 AM PDT by gobucks (http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/classics/students/Ribeiro/laocoon.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
I'm familiar w/ your sarcasm from your previous disagreements with me

*shrug* I don't remember dealing with you at all.

so your reply is not interesting and it makes you sound like you are not a grown up.

OK. Next time, don't insult my wife, and I won't have reason to respond.

32 posted on 10/29/2004 9:43:49 AM PDT by Sloth ("Rather is TV's real-life Ted Baxter, without Baxter's quiet dignity." -- Ann Coulter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

Pretty good.

As an aside, any "man" that lets his wife use a hyphenated name should turn his member in at the door.


33 posted on 10/29/2004 9:45:33 AM PDT by freedumb2003 (The cool points are out the window and you got me all twisted up in the game)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gobucks

welll done!


34 posted on 10/29/2004 9:46:59 AM PDT by dennisw (Gd - against Amelek for all generations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
I told him a woman who doesn't take the Pill is a far more interesting creature to pay attention to ... because ultimately, she is capable of loving him more, by seeking to help him grow up.

Utter nonsense. I didn't need a woman to help me grow up nor have I ever seen any difference between women who take the pil and those that do not.

35 posted on 10/29/2004 9:51:49 AM PDT by Modernman (Giving money and power to government is like giving whiskey and car keys to teenage boys. - P.J.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

Many thanks!


36 posted on 10/29/2004 10:02:35 AM PDT by gobucks (http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/classics/students/Ribeiro/laocoon.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Modernman

'Modernman' ... if being modern means that "I didn't need a woman to help me grow up nor have I ever seen any difference between women who take the pil and those that do not.",

well, then I guess I am quite glad I'm not modern. I needed my mother to help me grow up, and my wife has definitely given me added help to grow up more, thank god.


37 posted on 10/29/2004 10:08:46 AM PDT by gobucks (http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/classics/students/Ribeiro/laocoon.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Sloth

" OK. Next time, don't insult my wife, and I won't have reason to respond."

oh please. The context of the statement was my son would encounter single women who deliberately choose BCPs as the preferred way of life, and he would be better off choosing to encounter single women who chose NOT to use BCPs as a way of life. I didn't speak about married women (though I have thoughts on this too.)



38 posted on 10/29/2004 10:11:55 AM PDT by gobucks (http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/classics/students/Ribeiro/laocoon.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003

"As an aside, any "man" that lets his wife use a hyphenated name should turn his member in at the door".

I once spoke to a fellow who served as the admitting official at a hospital that performed sex change ops. I asked to confirm or deny a rumor I had heard: that 99 out 100 sex change ops are men switching to women. He said its true.

Too many men are indeed 'turning in his member'. One wonders what is so burdensome about the equipment they were issued.


39 posted on 10/29/2004 10:14:22 AM PDT by gobucks (http://oncampus.richmond.edu/academics/classics/students/Ribeiro/laocoon.htm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: gobucks
oh please. The context of the statement was my son would encounter single women who deliberately choose BCPs as the preferred way of life, and he would be better off choosing to encounter single women who chose NOT to use BCPs as a way of life.

I'd agree with that sentiment, but I wonder how he is going to know which women don't take them?

Incidentally, my wife took them when she was single -- for the treatment of severe endometriosis symptoms that would otherwise leave her nearly unable to move one week out of every month.

40 posted on 10/29/2004 10:25:15 AM PDT by Sloth ("Rather is TV's real-life Ted Baxter, without Baxter's quiet dignity." -- Ann Coulter)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-88 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson