So, in summation, I blame it on the Puritans. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/light_skin/diablo.gif
Printable View
So, in summation, I blame it on the Puritans. http://www.kolobok.us/smiles/light_skin/diablo.gif
just one in a long line of cultures that discount the agency of women! grr!!Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneV2.0
I don't feel singled out. But I do think you misunderstand me.
Foremost, I'm not "judging" anyone for having sex. I know that people are making choices about sex that I wouldn't make, and that I find personally morally repugnant or unethical. But, that doesn't mean that they don't have a different structure for decision making, that they should be ashamed, or that I am shaming them.
I have actively provided sex education and birth control for individuals whom I knew who were choosing to have sex as a teen, spending my own limited pocket money to do so. I actively looked to turn over rules in our school that pushed girls to choosing abortion over birthing their babies, so that they would choose to birth those babies instead. I supported those girls personally in a variety of ways, including encouraging them to seek medical care (prenatal care) and being with them when they spoke to their parents about it for the first time.
I continue to support sex education and access to birth control through both private organizations and public policy when applicable.
In the discussion, the concept of teaching abstinence was brought up. I commented that much of "abstinence based education" is misguided -- because it doesn't provide the information that the person (man or woman) needs to make good decisions about sex (when ultimately choosing to have sex). And, that when abstinence based education *is* part of a comprehensive education, in my experience it "misses the mark" in promoting abstinence as viable because it doesn't explain the why behind choosing that over choosing to have multiple partners.
I expressed the reasons why I feel that abstinence is important, or is better than casual sex, and that it applies to *people* equally regardless of sex or gender.
And that sexual ethics can still apply in other formations of sexual expression that are culturally different -- which means that a person can have multiple partners over multiple days and still meet the basic structure of sexual ethics if they are being thoughtful in their processes and decision making.
While I feel that it would be better for men and women to have fewer partners, it is not my decision to make for anyone else. I do not shame people for choosing differently from me, which is why I also find it imperative that IF people are choosing different from me that they have access to information and resources that can help them create the outcomes that they want and that I share (no unintended pregnancies leading to abortions, for example; no sexually transmitted diseases as well).
Just because I take a conservative view of sex does not mean that I'm not a pragmatist or realist about other people and their behaviors.
Just because I find certain behaviors as ethically questionable doesn't mean that I'm "shaming" someone.
And I never connected the "number of partners" with "having had an abortion" as part of the equation at all. I never put that connection forth. Most of the girls in my school had been with only ONE partner when the got pregnant and either kept that pregnancy or had an abortion, so there would be no basis for me to make such a claim.
Oh, and finally, when my husband and I were first married, we were using charting and a barrier method. Both failed, and I became pregnant. I miscarried and was *despartely thankful* because we were not ready. But during those first weeks when we discovered we were pregnant, we had a lot of talks about possibly seeking an abortion, carrying and keeping the baby, or putting the child up for adoption.
It was all a very serious consideration. I've had only one partner. We had an unintended pregnancy. We considered an abortion. Ultimately, the decision was made for us.
I'm glad that we could discuss it and make that decision. I think that it's important to be able to do so.
Zoebird, you are catching some of the heat for my comments... I'm the clueless prude here, apparently, so I'll own up to it. I'm not going to defend what I said other than to clarify that I also am not shaming anyone, and I certainly do not consider women's bodies public property. I agree with education, I agree with empowering women, I agree with easy access to birth control. But I don't think a little discernment is a bad thing when it comes to actions with such grave consequences, that's all.
I'm going to slip into my burqa and slink away now....
Well really you have to take equal precautions against pregnancy regardless of what age you are (if it falls somewhere between puberty and completion of menopause), regardless of your marital status, and regardless of how many partners you have. At least if you don't want kids.
The difference, Catherine (to quote Will Smith) is that you make that look good.Quote:
Originally Posted by catherine
But seriously, I understand what you're saying.
It's good we finally solved this issue.
catherine and zoebird, i see where you are coming from and i respect your point of view.
it's just that it still strikes me as, like, 'well i don't get these girls and think they are making a huge mistake but i'm willing to help them out anyway.'
the thing is, not everyone thinks having multiple sexual partners is a big mistake! in fact, i think quite the opposite! i treasure my (many shocking!) sexual experiences because i learned a great deal from them about myself, what i like, who i am in relationships, and what kind of relationship i ultimately wanted to be in.
there are lots of reasons to have sex, and "because he was cute and i felt like it" is as valid as any. it doesn't always have to be some big meaningful thing. some of my favorite experiences were transitory and yet i still treasure them. and i'm sure when i'm old and gray i'll be glad i have those memories.
i applaud all efforts to educate people, and to get the contraception out there into the hands that need it ... but i guess i would like to see us approach these issues from a position of wanting to liberate women to express themselves sexually however they as individuals see fit, rather than from a place of wanting to minimize the damage caused by these choices that you think are wrong.
I think you are putting something onto me that isn't there in your last statement.
I don't think that sexual choices outside of and beyond abstinence and monogamy are wrong.
I believe that some people can be unethical in their sexual behaviors. This is not categorical to any one "formation" of a sex life, nor is it connected to the number of partners a person has. I dislike it when people are unethical (in general), and in particular in regards to sex because it is such a valuable experience (in it's many forms).
I've never got the correlation between any number of partners and the likelihood a woman will end up seeking an abortion. A woman who is, shall we say, more adventurous in her sex life but always precautionary would seem to be less prone to having an unintended pregnancy than a woman with only a few partners that did not take steps to prevent pregnancy.
Most opposition to abortion is value based which is an absolutely legitimate position to hold. Where critical thinking breaks down is when the sometimes associated concepts of promiscuity and/or virtue enter the conversation. I know plenty of people who firmly believe that making contraceptives available to high school kids is akin to issuing a license to have sex. While I would like to cover my ears, sing la la la and go on believing my grandkids will be immaculately conceived, it probably ain't gonna happen that way. In the real world I would rather my kids learn about relationships in a healthy and sane fashion. That will probably include sex (not sure why I added "probably"). Educating them and granting access to contraceptives is as close as we can get to insuring they won't have to weigh having an abortion vs. being an unprepared young parent. An ounce of prevention won't eliminate the debate, but it would sure help get it to a more manageable level.
I really don't intend to dip back into this conversation, because Gregg is absolutely right--when it turns to values it gets personal, and I don't mean to do that. Madgeylou, you sound like a strong and very self-assured woman--I respect you and your choices, even though I can never in a million years see myself having the same "adventures" as you did. Then again, my background filters include a birds and bees talk with my mother that left me with the impression that I could get pregnant if I wore a short-sleeved shirt. So much for sex education.
I will leave you all with this study. I figured if I ever want to go shooting my mouth off with my uninformed hypotheses, it would be good to get more information, so here's one study that addresses unintended pregnancy, a topic without which we wouldn't have to have much of a conversation about abortion at all:
http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3002498.html
that guttmacher institute has a lot of great articles and information.
My cousins had to make this choice. Their first pregnancy, the fetus had no brain. They were Catholic. It was a difficult decision. But in the end, a fetus without a brain will never become a baby.Quote:
Originally Posted by peggy