Pages

Jump to bottom

7 comments

1 calochortus  Sat, Feb 25, 2012 9:36:15am

I respectfully disagree. I believe there are a lot of reasons why contraception is a good thing and I think it's a good idea for insurance to pay for it. I further believe that women have every bit as much right to sexual pleasure as men do. No argument there. However, I also have a right to do a lot of things for pleasure without involving others in paying for them. I think that undermines this line of argument.

The issue here seems to me to be medical in nature and therefore should be discussed in those terms. As I see it, not getting pregnant is a medical issue. Pregnancy is a drain on the system. I will go so far as to use the word "parasitic". Now, with a wanted pregnancy it is a joy to provide for one's offspring with the very flesh of one's flesh, but can still be physically exhausting. It can adversely affect health, even in a healthy woman.
Then there are all the other reasons why one might take birth control pills for other hormonal issues.

2 Obdicut  Sat, Feb 25, 2012 11:00:52am

re: #1 calochortus

There's nothing wrong in women having sex for pleasure.

3 calochortus  Sat, Feb 25, 2012 11:14:10am

re: #2 Obdicut

There's nothing wrong in women having sex for pleasure.

As a woman, I absolutely agree with that. My quibble is with the validity of the argument that someone will be convinced to pay for contraception based upon my right to pleasure.

I've seen way too many people who are against funding contraception argue that pregnancy isn't an illness and therefore doesn't fall under the category of medical need. I disagree. I think it falls under the category of preventing a condition which necessarily has a profound impact on a woman's body.

Medicine attempts to prevent as well as treats many conditions which aren't illnesses. You can make a case that osteoporosis isn't a disease, since it is a common condition for women as they age, and insurance shouldn't pay for treating it-just for fixing the bones when they break. It wouldn't be a good case for it, but you could make the argument.

4 CuriousLurker  Sat, Feb 25, 2012 11:26:47am

re: #1 calochortus

I respectfully disagree. I believe there are a lot of reasons why contraception is a good thing and I think it's a good idea for insurance to pay for it. I further believe that women have every bit as much right to sexual pleasure as men do. No argument there. However, I also have a right to do a lot of things for pleasure without involving others in paying for them. I think that undermines this line of argument.

I don't think it undermines it. We do a lot of things for pleasure that don't involve others paying for them, however most of those things are voluntary. The desire to have sex isn't, it's biological, similar to eating.

Granted, not eating will eventually kill you, whereas not having sex won't, however both are controlled by biology. If I'm hungry I'm going to eat, even if it means consuming unhealthy things that taste awful, like tree bark or mud. It's the same with sex, people are going to engage in it no matter what; the fact that it is (or can be) pleasurable is part of what makes it desirable, and, again, that pleasure is driven by biology, not greed or covetousness (as are many other pleasures).

For this reason, I agree with the main premise of the article, if not the exact wording or presentation.

5 Obdicut  Sat, Feb 25, 2012 11:40:20am

re: #3 calochortus

As a woman, I absolutely agree with that. My quibble is with the validity of the argument that someone will be convinced to pay for contraception based upon my right to pleasure.

Who's saying anyone has to pay for someone else's contraception?

6 calochortus  Sat, Feb 25, 2012 11:55:27am

Always interesting to see how other people interpret things-which is one of the things I love about discussions here.

I do agree with the premise that women have a right to separate sex from reproduction. I just don't think that is necessarily an argument that will convince many people that insurance should pay for contraception.
I also agree that "women need birth control pills for other purposed than contraception" is a weak (though perfectly valid) argument.
Where I part company is that I think we need to include a realistic discussion of what pregnancy means for a women physically.

There's a lot of romanticism surrounding pregnancy and motherhood-to the point where women are often afraid to express any negative feelings. Any mother can tell you that no matter how wanted the child, there are times when you would cheerfully give him or her away in exchange for a good night's sleep.

I don't think most people stop to think about what pregnancy actual means for a woman's body. It's not just like strapping on bigger belly and having amusing food cravings. I love my children and went through my pregnancies more than willingly, but I deeply resent other people trying to tell me that in this one instance I need to give up all my rights to the integrity of my own body. A situation which is not permitted anywhere else in society.

7 calochortus  Sat, Feb 25, 2012 11:56:46am

re: #5 Obdicut

Umm, I think this all came up because of the mandate that insurance companies provide free contraception.


This page has been archived.
Comments are closed.

Jump to top

Create a PageThis is the LGF Pages posting bookmarklet. To use it, drag this button to your browser's bookmark bar, and title it 'LGF Pages' (or whatever you like). Then browse to a site you want to post, select some text on the page to use for a quote, click the bookmarklet, and the Pages posting window will appear with the title, text, and any embedded video or audio files already filled in, ready to go.
Or... you can just click this button to open the Pages posting window right away.
Last updated: 2023-04-04 11:11 am PDT
LGF User's Guide RSS Feeds

Help support Little Green Footballs!

Subscribe now for ad-free access!Register and sign in to a free LGF account before subscribing, and your ad-free access will be automatically enabled.

Donate with
PayPal
Cash.app
Recent PagesClick to refresh
The Pandemic Cost 7 Million Lives, but Talks to Prevent a Repeat Stall In late 2021, as the world reeled from the arrival of the highly contagious omicron variant of the coronavirus, representatives of almost 200 countries met - some online, some in-person in Geneva - hoping to forestall a future worldwide ...
Cheechako
2 days ago
Views: 102 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1
Texas County at Center of Border Fight Is Overwhelmed by Migrant Deaths EAGLE PASS, Tex. - The undertaker lighted a cigarette and held it between his latex-gloved fingers as he stood over the bloated body bag lying in the bed of his battered pickup truck. The woman had been fished out ...
Cheechako
2 weeks ago
Views: 267 • Comments: 0 • Rating: 1