Skip to comments.Relationships Market After 50 Years of The Pill
Posted on 09/29/2010 8:33:41 AM PDT by marshmallow
FAR from bringing equality, contraception has redistributed power away from women, says George Pell.
THIS year is the 50th anniversary of the contraceptive pill, a development that has changed Western life enormously, in some ways most people do not understand.
While majority opinion regards the pill as a significant social benefit for giving women greater control of their fertility, the consensus is not overwhelming, especially among women.
A May CBS News poll of 591 adult Americans found that 59 per cent of men and 54 per cent of women believed the pill had made women's lives better.
In an article in the ecumenical journal First Things that month, North American economist Timothy Reichert approached the topic with "straight-forward microeconomic reasoning", concluding that contraception had triggered a redistribution of wealth and power from women and children to men.
Applying the insights of the market, he points out that relative scarcity or abundance affects behaviour in important ways and that significant technological changes, such as the pill, have broad social effects. His basic thesis is that the pill has divided what was once a single mating market into two markets.
This first is a market for sexual relationships, which most young men and women frequent early in their adult life. The second is a market for marital or partnership relationships, where most participate later on.
Because the pill means that participation in the sex market need not result in pregnancy, the costs of having premarital and extra-marital sex have been lowered.
The old single mating market was populated by roughly the same number of men and women, but this is no longer the case in the two new markets.
Because most women want to have children, they enter the marriage market earlier than men, often by their early 30s. Men are under no.........
(Excerpt) Read more at theaustralian.com.au ...
I tell my girls, you hold the power as long as you cross your legs.
Once you give it up, they have power over you.
Went on at 16 because of so much pain & bleeding every month. Tried to have a baby 10 years later and found out that the reason I has issues was PCOS. The pill did not solve my problems, it only masked them. I went back on the pill after I had my son. After three days I felt like crap and threw them away. My milk production plummeted and never returned to what I had been producing. I will never use the pill again.
I don’t necessarily disagree with you in principle, but I would be hesitant to explain sex to a girl as a gendered power struggle. It seems to me that instilling such a view could have detrimental effects on their marital sex lives (in which sex should not be a power-play).
If women don’t have the power, you haven’t been paying attention. Most married men I know are completely whipped.
If The Pill made contraception convenient, then why are there so many women with multiple baby daddies?
You really sure that’s the message you want your kids going off into life with?
You don’t have a very high opinion of mankind, do you?
Legalized abortion did it, not The Pill. The major threat of STDs makes The Pill far more useful in a family-planning situation than for mere recreation.
While approached as an economic analysis of sorts, I notice they make no mention of the actual economic aspects of relationships or divorce.
That’s so sad.
Once they start looking at it as a power issue, they’ve lost anyway.
“...The Pill far more useful in a family-planning situation ....” Concur. It’s a tool to make your life more orderly, not a license to go haywire. There are inherent risks, so you choose to take them or not. P.S. People misuse hammers, too....
That's a common straw man, and it wasn't what wideawake was saying at all. Even with infertile couples, sexual intercourse still is potentially procreative, because infertility is sometimes overcome.
“looking at it as a power issue.” Concur on that one, too. Grandsons #1 and 2 visited us for a couple of weeks one summer, and #1 asked my husband, “But who has the power?” We looked at him, dumbfounded, and my husband launched a crash course on negotiation, relationships, respect, mate selection,etc. Not sure how much effect it had, because he left with a hand book on negotiations, a new stereo that he bought for a smokin’ low price, and the opinion that we “look at the cup as half full, not half empty.” Go figure.
It is, quite obviously, a matter of intentionality.
The infertile couple does not set out intending to be unable to conceive.
Not so the pilltaker, pride marcher, or adult DVD collector.
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
“Yet another reason to remain single, celibate, and sane.” Yay! Grandson #1 is still single. I bet when you two select mates, those relationships will be assessed carefully, extensively and, hopefully,will LAST! Good for you guys! :)
You just made my day with that post. I have received some bad news lately and the laugh I just got was well needed. Thanks to you and your husband!
Yes, a pink unicorn might gallop by and miraculously put a fetus into a woman's non-existent uterus. But I think that is a lot less likely than a fertile woman getting pregnant despite use of The Pill.
When I last checked, I understood that even the Roman Catholic Church recognized that sex without procreation is still a valid use of the equipment, as it can bring couples together emotionally.
But perhaps I misunderstood.
The two are connected. More than most people know.
Back in the swingin' '60s, the Pill was in fact marketed as an antidote to abortion. It still is, to some extent. Eliminate unwanted pregnancies before they begin, goes the theory, and you will remove the need for abortion.
No, said the Pope Paul VI in a document named Humanae Vitae published in 1968. The Pill will lead inexorably to the cheapening of the procreational act which in turn will lead to women being viewed as mere sex objects. This will result in a greater demand for abortion, not less.
So who was right?
Well, five years after Humanae Vitae, we got Roe v Wade and it has been with us ever since. Abortion is now proclaimed to be a human right in some quarters and it's not hard to see a time when the denial of abortion will be viewed as a violation of "human rights" and a crime. It's clear that the Pill has not eliminated the demand for abortion one iota and instead the killing goes on unabated.
We will continue to have abortion on demand in this country as long as sexual relations are deemed to be legitimate recreational activity. That in turn is down to the Pill. Roe v Wade will not be overturned until there is a sea-change in personal morality.