Mansplaining

[justdrew]

if there were, and their probably will be eventually, a male birth control pill, it will most likely require consulting with a health care provider periodically, and a prescription for that reason. You see, what the pills do is a significant alteration of the human body via hormone manipulation. It's far more significant an issue than a rubber.

At any rate, it is a MEDICAL ISSUE, and is often, and should be universally, covered as a part of health insurance of any sort.

So get the chip off your shoulder and get with it FFS

or do you want to QQ some more about how them lady folk get all the luck?

[Iamwhomiam]

Here's some illumination for you, Kyrsos: the organization is called Planned Parenhood, not Planned Motherhood; men can receive free contraception as well.

You can also find free contraception though any of the Aids Prevention programs found in most cities, so quit your petty griping.

There are far more costs involved in caring for babies whose mother was malnourished. And you think nothing of not making such contraception as the day after pill available to children, young women raped by their father or brother or some other relative.

You're cold, Krysos.

And too cheap to know your budget-cutting priorities are grossly misplaced.

Iceman, you shall be called henceforth.

[82_28]

I guess what I mean it is constantly on my mind. And I don't think I am Jesus. It's rough. If Twyla or Willow want to hit me up, please do. Or anyone in the area that can provide a semblance of support without making her feel like a charity case. But we're gonna need females.

[jlaw172364]

@Krysos

There are many government programs that men have historically benefited from far more than women. Birth control expenditures aren't even belly button lint when compared to the vast sums of money that are taxed and spent. I mean, what are we talkin about here? Dissemination of some information? Latex? Pills? Access to relatively simple surgical techniques? It's not like women are asking for men to build them their own StarWars Missle Defense boondoggle.

The opposition to birth control has less to do with concerns over spending money, and more over taking the control of population increase and decrease away from the individual, limiting individual freedom, keeping the proletarian class in check, etc. etc. It's also especially about distracting women on the democracy battlefield by putting them on the defensive, protecting the very sovereignty of their bodies, so they can't do more dangerous things, like challenging how the corporate oligarchy poisons and otherwise harms them. To pretend otherwise is disingenuous gaslighting.

@ 82_28

Please don't lump in with Krysos.

I think it's always a mistake to generalize. You might assume that since women carry children to term inside their bodies, that they have some special rapport with them that men can never achieve. While this may be true in many instances, there are many women who DON'T feel this rapport. Many women resent the child for burdening them with its demands. Many women loathe their children. That's why many women abuse and murder their children, or give them up for adoption.

These sorts of generalizations are why I'm not a fan of terms like mansplaining that implicitly propose the existence of an idealized man that all us men unconsciously emulate. I have seen too many women engage in the practice of what these people describe as mansplaining to believe that it's purely confined to males. So then, were they ladysplaining? No. The term is meaningless. It's just more fodder for the gender wars to give certain women ammunition to use against certain men. And look, it's happening right here on this board. Why not just call it knowitallism? Arrogance? Windbaggery? Why does it have to be assigned a gender to increase the likelihood of demonization of men? Divide and conquer, is my opinion.

I think these women read a lot of gender theory, and then their reality tunnel and pattern recognition become all about seeing male patriarchy in every last practice, no matter how innocuous, even if it could just as easily be explained in gender neutral terms, like the man doing the alleged mansplaining came from a privileged family, went to an ivy league school, and therefore feels entitled to hold court on everything.

[Krysos]

Here's some illumination for you, Kyrsos: the organization is called Planned Parenhood, not Planned Motherhood; men can receive free contraception as well.

You can also find free contraception though any of the Aids Prevention programs found in most cities, so quit your petty griping.

There are far more costs involved in caring for babies whose mother was malnourished. And you think nothing of not making such contraception as the day after pill available to children, young women raped by their father or brother or some other relative.

You're cold, Krysos.

And too cheap to know your budget-cutting priorities are grossly misplaced.

Iceman, you shall be called henceforth.

Well it's not really free if someone's paying for it now is it? Why should anyone have to pay for anyone else's birth control that they aren't involved with intimately? I'm still interested in hearing an argument for free birth control that isn't based on it being less of a burden to the state (i.e. YOUR LABOR) than caring for the children that will be born to these destitute or irresponsible people. We're talking about at most, 600 dollars a year in terms of contraception, for an optional activity that people have a choice to engage in or not. At least some people do, anyway. How do you think the people that can't get laid feel about having to pay for the contraception of those that can? I'm guessing not too good. But who cares about those losers anyway, right?

I haven't said a word about morning after pills in cases of rape, so I don't know why you're even bringing that up unless you either don't have the ability to distinguish between people that choose to have sex and those that are raped, or you merely wish to encourage others to confuse the two. If you'd actually like me to give your point of view any consideration you might want to try to argue in a manner that's not quite so knee jerk and hysterical as to include insults and presumptions along the lines of calling me Iceman, cold, cheap, and petty.

[Krysos]

That larger sums of money have been taken from one group to the benefit of another does not justify or excuse taking smaller amounts of money from one group to unjustly support another. I say this as one who is nonetheless in favor of redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor, albeit largely because it's my belief that the rich benefit more from corruption than they do from working harder.

[justdrew]

That larger sums of money have been taken from one group to the benefit of another does not justify or excuse taking smaller amounts of money from one group to unjustly support another. I say this as one who is nonetheless in favor of redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor, albeit largely because it's my belief that the rich benefit more from corruption than they do from working harder.

you're position is nuts man. It's like you think their forcing you to buy toothpaste for German-Americans or something. Birth control pills are a basic health care issue, ergo, systems that pay for healthcare must cover it. The only reason it's come up as an issue is due to bullshit abiblical dogma issued by the pope.

[Krysos]

That larger sums of money have been taken from one group to the benefit of another does not justify or excuse taking smaller amounts of money from one group to unjustly support another. I say this as one who is nonetheless in favor of redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor, albeit largely because it's my belief that the rich benefit more from corruption than they do from working harder.

you're position is nuts man. It's like you think their forcing you to buy toothpaste for German-Americans or something. Birth control pills are a basic health care issue, ergo, systems that pay for healthcare must cover it. The only reason it's come up as an issue is due to bullshit abiblical dogma issued by the pope.

Maybe it's a judgmental, dickish thing of me to do, but it's hard to take you seriously when you can't even use you're or their properly. It's got nothing to do with religion, but I'm not surprised to see that you're so limited in your thinking that you can't conceive of it being anything but. It's about how one group of people should not be forced to pay for the CHOICES other people CHOOSE to make. I have compassion for people that aren't able to control themselves enough to prevent themselves from becoming a burden to society whether it's from an inability to control their own procreation or through health issues caused by addiction or a simple inability to eat or drink anything besides soda and junk food. I'm not saying that these people should be left to die in the streets and not be provided medical care. Certainly their children deserve to be cared for more than some Wall Street dickbag deserves another tax break. But if the left in this country remains unable to see that there's plenty of compassionate and hardworking people that are middle class or working poor that are sick and tired of paying for the indulgences of others (and instead focus on gender and lifestyle issues), then they will continue to marginalize themselves.

[justdrew]

That larger sums of money have been taken from one group to the benefit of another does not justify or excuse taking smaller amounts of money from one group to unjustly support another. I say this as one who is nonetheless in favor of redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor, albeit largely because it's my belief that the rich benefit more from corruption than they do from working harder.

you're position is nuts man. It's like you think their forcing you to buy toothpaste for German-Americans or something. Birth control pills are a basic health care issue, ergo, systems that pay for healthcare must cover it. The only reason it's come up as an issue is due to bullshit abiblical dogma issued by the pope.

Maybe it's a judgmental, dickish thing of me to do, but it's hard to take you seriously when you can't even use you're or their properly. It's got nothing to do with religion, but I'm not surprised to see that you're so limited in your thinking that you can't conceive of it being anything but. It's about how one group of people should not be forced to pay for the CHOICES other people CHOOSE to make. I have compassion for people that aren't able to control themselves enough to prevent themselves from becoming a burden to society whether it's from an inability to control their own procreation or through health issues caused by addiction or a simple inability to eat or drink anything besides soda and junk food. I'm not saying that these people should be left to die in the streets and not be provided medical care. Certainly their children deserve to be cared for more than some Wall Street dickbag deserves another tax break. But if the left in this country remains unable to see that there's plenty of compassionate and hardworking people that are middle class or working poor that are sick and tired of paying for the indulgences of others (and instead focus on gender and lifestyle issues), then they will continue to marginalize themselves.

sorry, I changed "You're nuts" to "your position is nuts" and failed to change the first word

what other examples of "paying for the indulgences of others" can you name?

I consider your position to be based on some obsession and typical right wing "I'm a poor put-upon victim" mythologizing.

Also, based on human psychology, it is not a healthy good or viable choice to remain celibate ONLY in order to avoid pregnancy.

but anyway, it's a LONG established medical function, and so should clearly be covered by any insurance like program. I can't imagine why you're so offended by this minor cost. The only change in is even MORE minor, since many health plans already covered it.

[Krysos]

Well, thanks for taking the time to judge the position instead of the person. I'll try to give the same respect in return.

I would consider anything anyone does that requires someone else to sacrifice the fruits of their labor without their permission to be an indulgence. Why should one person be forced to pay for another's activities without their permission? The only difference I see between the capitalist that seeks to exploit the labor of others and the average person that receives more resources from the society than they contribute to be a matter of scale and perhaps the nature of their neurosis. I'm in no way in favor of celibacy, and I'm in agreement with you that a lack of sexual fulfillment is not psychologically healthy. Perhaps what we really need to do is find a way to publicly fund brothels so that the sexually repressed or unfortunately celibate might find fulfillment? Not that this would do anything to fix the free rider problem inherent in any redistribution schemes (pun intended).

I seriously doubt that all of these people who are afforded free birth control could not make some sacrifice in some other aspect of their life to afford the, at most, $600 dollars a year that birth control costs. Maybe eat out less. Maybe buy cheap beer, or none at all. The point is that some of them could afford it but simply choose not to because they know that someone else will pay for it for them. And again, this says nothing of the millions of people that are celibate through no choice of their own, yet have to pay for other people's fun. You say it's typical right wing victim mentality, but how is this any different from the left wing mentality that seeks to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor?

It seems to me that it's simply people asking that they not have to play by a different set of rules than anyone else. I.e., if I have to pay for my birth control, why shouldn't you? The only difference between the wall street banker and the welfare queen is the scale of their theft and it's efficaciousness. Both justify their theft in one way or the other. They both think they deserve their ill-gotten gains. Now, don't get me wrong, I have a lot more sympathy for the people on the lower end of the scale but I don't think either one is justified, really.

[82_28]

Maybe it's a judgmental, dickish thing of me to do, but it's hard to take you seriously when you can't even use you're or their properly.

The only reason you can be dickish is because the person you are addressing is the person who has made this site for the most part, possible. Give him some code to chew on, drew. Mansplain a little database talk.

[justdrew]

how is this any different from the left wing mentality that seeks to redistribute wealth from the rich to the poor?

eh eh eh

no you don't. That is not what "the left" seeks AT ALL, we'd like to see the fruits of everyone's collective industry shared more fairly with those who do the work that makes the fruits. This requires organized for-hire labor.

Also, a cursory investigation of economics would show you that a system wherein all funds flow up to a small minority is not long-term functional. Redistribution is an essential function of any economy, without it there's no money in circulation.

no one loves the idea of a "welfare queen" just popping out little baby paychecks. First off, I'd say it's fairly rare occurrence, and second, what choice do we have? Take the kids? Sterilize the mom? Leave them to fend for themselves and possibly turn to crime?

you seem to forget that we live in a society. Society, look it up. I had to "pay more" for health insurance (when I had it) in order to pay for breeders to cover their children. I didn't force them to have kids, why should I pay more? Because it's the decent thing to do. Same with all the other crap that get's built or done or whatever with "my money" - get over it, you want to live independently, go befriend a bear and move to the woods. Oh way, you don't actually own sufficient land to be self-sufficient? Well, welcome to the society of humans on earth, it's not a perfect place you may have noticed. but we get along ok, together.

[justdrew]

...

I'd rather that not be brought up, I don't want any special treatment.

[Krysos]

Fair enough. Admittedly it was a cheap shot and it karmically only made me look stupid I suppose. I'm sure there will be no shortage of others to assist me in this endeavor once they wake up.

[justdrew]

speaking of waking up, I seem to be slurring my text. time for night night.