What Is Wrong With the World??
Sep. 4th, 2008 11:56 am1. headline from bbcni re cervical cancer jab - "Girls urged to ABSTAIN in jab row"
why? Because its a dirty cancer you can get from SEX and obviously if you've been having sex you deserve it. Or... something.
More from the helpful FAQ here -
Colin Hart, Director of The Christian Institute, said the way to tackle the problem was not to offer injections, but to tell girls not to have under-age sex.
Ahh. So it's only *underage* sex that causes cancer. Good Girls won't get it, and thus don't need vaccinated. Well that's all clear then!
I know there are Other Issues around the vaccination and which version was chosen etc, but that's not what these people are saying. They're saying girls shouldn't be vaccinated against a potentially TERMINAL DISEASE, because then they might have sex! And we can't have that!!
Would there be the same outcry if it was discovered testicular cancer was also linked to a virus and teenage boys were offered it?
2. This article about date rape is making my head explode with WTF and RAGE. Because obviously if you go drinking with a guy who turns out not to care whether or not you're concious when he gets off on/in you, well that's YOUR fault you silly loose drunken woman. It's not like he's done anything WRONG, or should face any consequences for it! SKIN CRAWLING NOW.
SEND KITTENS PLZ. NEED HAPPY THOUGHTS.
ETA New Mistful Fic! and at lunchtime too. Couldn't have been better timed.
EDIT 2 - just to add, now the original RAGE has calmed slightly, this turned into a thought provoking discussion; a timely reminder the world isn't completley full of morons. Or at least my flist isn't ;) Thanks!
AAAAND if we can keep it civil kids, that would be good.
_unhurt_, I still have crutches. And I know where you live. Keep up the ranting tho. Rants Good. CIder better. MOAR CIDER
why? Because its a dirty cancer you can get from SEX and obviously if you've been having sex you deserve it. Or... something.
More from the helpful FAQ here -
Colin Hart, Director of The Christian Institute, said the way to tackle the problem was not to offer injections, but to tell girls not to have under-age sex.
Ahh. So it's only *underage* sex that causes cancer. Good Girls won't get it, and thus don't need vaccinated. Well that's all clear then!
I know there are Other Issues around the vaccination and which version was chosen etc, but that's not what these people are saying. They're saying girls shouldn't be vaccinated against a potentially TERMINAL DISEASE, because then they might have sex! And we can't have that!!
Would there be the same outcry if it was discovered testicular cancer was also linked to a virus and teenage boys were offered it?
2. This article about date rape is making my head explode with WTF and RAGE. Because obviously if you go drinking with a guy who turns out not to care whether or not you're concious when he gets off on/in you, well that's YOUR fault you silly loose drunken woman. It's not like he's done anything WRONG, or should face any consequences for it! SKIN CRAWLING NOW.
SEND KITTENS PLZ. NEED HAPPY THOUGHTS.
ETA New Mistful Fic! and at lunchtime too. Couldn't have been better timed.
EDIT 2 - just to add, now the original RAGE has calmed slightly, this turned into a thought provoking discussion; a timely reminder the world isn't completley full of morons. Or at least my flist isn't ;) Thanks!
AAAAND if we can keep it civil kids, that would be good.
no subject
Date: 2008-09-06 09:17 am (UTC)* What if I have sex with someone who regrets it?
How many people, honestly, would call the police and get all of that attention over a regret? Who would go through the examinations and interviews over a regret? No. Fucking. One. Argument closed, stupid point.
* What if I'm drunk and she's drunk and regrets it in the morning?
Firstly, who made you get drunk? You did. Everything after that point is also your choice and a result of your choices.
Also see the answer to the first point.
* What? Am I expected to get written consent with two neutral observers before I have sex?
If you're unsure enough for it to go that far DON'T HAVE SEX! Seriously. Not having sex should be the default position. It's easier for a start. Witness the not having sex happening all the time without any special preparations.
If there is uncertainty then clear that uncertainty up before whipping it out and putting it where it doesn't belong.
Here's a tip, if you're racking your brains for a nice juicy grey area to support your ludicrous point, then my answer is don't have sex. Not just with that person. Just don't have sex. If you're expending effort to argue against a very simple premise - don't have sex in a situation where you're not sure consent has been given - then your genes need to be removed from the pool. Use the time you save not having sex to work towards a Darwin Award.
You ask if you should move this to the bedroom, she says yes. You go. You sit next to her and she leans in for a kiss, you kiss. She takes her top off, maybe sits in your lap and puts her boobs in your face, you try to act like a grown up and not shout "Yippee!" Things start to get heavy and you take off her trousers, she giggles as she slides the condom on you (those things... who fails to laugh at them? ;). You start to have sex and she frowns and looks uncomfortable, YOU STOP. You take a few steps back (maybe not physical steps away, that might be weird, although it might also be reasonable, but you certainly get off her and and ask what's wrong). If you don't then, to me, you are raping her from that point on.
But hey, I have the belief that a woman can say no, or even imply it, even during sex and it means no and carries as much weight as if she'd said no before you even started to speak to her and your actions after that point are rape just as much as they would be if you dragged that woman out back and fucked her in the alley. It's a crazy, topsy-turvy point of view, I know, but hey, I'm crazy like that.