FishEaters Traditional Catholic Forums

Full Version: Men, Women, and Birth Control
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Dear all,
I recently read this article (http://www.catholic.org/national/nationa...p?id=51691) on Catholic Online. I think its a generally decent Catholic news site, but I have had run-ins with the author of this article before. She represents a breed that seems to place the blame of all of woman's misery on men. She cherry-picked the words of one pin headed person who just happened to be male. She conveniently leaves out that most hardcore pro-abortionists and supporters of free birth control are women. It was a law passed by Nancy Pelosi, mandated by HHS secretary Kathleen Sebelious, and defended by Sandra Fluke. Also, over 90% of all Catholic women use ABC. Further more 55% of women voted for Obama (most pro-abortion president in history) wheres as only 45% of men did.

Perhaps in the 50's / 60's men pushed the pills but these days not so. Most women freely choose to use the pill because of "career goals" and mostly because they want spontaneous pleasure without pregnancy (the benefit they think men have). If a man DARES speak against abortion or ABC he is promptly labeled a misogynist. Despite a man's innate desire to protect a woman, the woman rises against him in rebellion if he disagrees with her in anyway on this issue. "Hell hath no fury like a woman's scorn" or so they say.

I am often turned off by women like the author that dump responsibility of the issue so severely and totally on men. I think these kind of women do more harm than good because they create a strawman and verbally attack like there is no tomorrow. Men certainly play a role in this wickedness but seeing women as just hapless victims is totally unjust. When I read garbage like this, the last thing it inspires me to do is rally to the cause. In fact it encourages me to distance myself because the argument is weak / faulty / inaccurate generalization.

What do you all think?
In the heady years of Vietnam dissent, women felt that hip men only wanted them for "free love". The provocateurs of those days like Gloria Steinem, or Helen Gurley Brown, convinced women the way to emancipation was through the "pill" which would free them from children, and allow them to have purposeful lives, not to mention a sex life with whom ever they please.  All of the hip men said "yeah baby". There was a bit of resentment also, in that women felt the hip men could really dissent by evading the draft or burning their "draft cards". But what did they have ?  With the provocateurs came the answer to both questions, and they burned their bras, and jumped on the sex-a -go-round of the time.

Frankly many women resisted the hip men, until the provocateurs did their job. Certainly some hip men pushed and used the "free love" club but wasn't a broad scale success until the answer came in the women's movement.  It always takes two to tango, and men would always try to get a woman to dance, yet had not the "pill" called Enovid-E come on the market, and advertised as the first "safe" contraceptive in 64 or 65, this could never have happened.

tim
Her argument from Humanae Vitae was fairly convincing, I thought.

My experience is that the most passionate defenders of the pro-life cause have all been women, and the most vehement defenders of abortion have been men.

"Contraception/abortion have done much to objectify women." Hard to argue with that.
(07-17-2013, 10:33 PM)Philosoraptor Wrote: [ -> ]Her argument from Humanae Vitae was fairly convincing, I thought.

My experience is that the most passionate defenders of the pro-life cause have all been women, and the most vehement defenders of abortion have been men.

"Contraception/abortion have done much to objectify women." Hard to argue with that.

I would beg to differ. The Catholic clergy and hierarchy are pretty male last I checked and staunchly against abortion / contraception. Same with many Republicans (Chris Smith). Modern women certainly defend this wickedness with ferocity. Sandra Fluke? Leena Dunham? I could name more but you get the point. Also, more men vote Republican than women so your claim is not really factual. Granted not all Republicans are pro-life but more are or at least support defunding PP. Women are overwhelmingly Democrat thus supports of abortion and 55% voted for the most pro-abortion President in history compared to 45% of men!

My point is that men are objectified too and women are "pigs" too. I think the culpability and blame is equal. In our materialistic age women want their piece of the pie. That includes influential careers, pompous awards, and money. If they need birth control to achieve that while having pleasure too they will use it. Men do not have a monopoly on hubris. Women do just fine on their own IMO.

(07-17-2013, 10:32 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]In the heady years of Vietnam dissent, women felt that hip men only wanted them for "free love". The provocateurs of those days like Gloria Steinem, or Helen Gurley Brown, convinced women the way to emancipation was through the "pill" which would free them from children, and allow them to have purposeful lives, not to mention a sex life with whom ever they please.  All of the hip men said "yeah baby". There was a bit of resentment also, in that women felt the hip men could really dissent by evading the draft or burning their "draft cards". But what did they have ?  With the provocateurs came the answer to both questions, and they burned their bras, and jumped on the sex-a -go-round of the time.

Frankly many women resisted the hip men, until the provocateurs did their job. Certainly some hip men pushed and used the "free love" club but wasn't a broad scale success until the answer came in the women's movement.  It always takes two to tango, and men would always try to get a woman to dance, yet had not the "pill" called Enovid-E come on the market, and advertised as the first "safe" contraceptive in 64 or 65, this could never have happened.

tim

Agreed
I came back to underline this. The "pill" was not there before 64-65, so no men were pushing women before that. In 64-65 forty one states still outlawed it's use because none to that point were "safe". This in it's entirety started then and not before. I saw with my own eyes the acceleration of it's use as I was a part-time clerk in a drug store, with checking in the drugs as one of my responsibilities. I was a an eye witness to this change, and like other issues, the truth has been lost in the progressive fog.

tim
(07-18-2013, 07:44 AM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]I came back to underline this. The "pill" was not there before 64-65, so no men were pushing women before that. In 64-65 forty one states still outlawed it's use because none to that point were "safe". This in it's entirety started then and not before. I saw with my own eyes the acceleration of it's use as I was a part-time clerk in a drug store, with checking in the drugs as one of my responsibilities. I was a an eye witness to this change, and like other issues, the truth has been lost in the progressive fog.

tim

I'm 27 and I am just realizing this mess started before I was even born. Guess I lived a somewhat sheltered life. I'm glad people like you share their wisdom because the best way to understand a problem is at its roots. There is no "magic pill" for a fix because human beings have been desiring this kind of thing for millenia.
(07-17-2013, 10:33 PM)Philosoraptor Wrote: [ -> ]My experience is that the most passionate defenders of the pro-life cause have all been women, and the most vehement defenders of abortion have been men.

I figure this is accurate because men would be obligated to 18 years of child support for a child they didn't want.
The in depth on this is back when Paul went to Jerusalem to confront Peter to his face on the pagan's food and the Judaizers, some unknown Catholic Scribe wrote down some of what went on among them. There is scholarly attempts at who was there including James the Just the first Bishop of Jerusalem, but in that account named the Didache is a warning against using the pharmaceuticals concocted by pagan temple whores and priestesses for the purpose of abortion and contraception.
This has been with us from day one, but, and it's the big but, it took us until 64-65 to make a pill that worked and didn't kill the woman too.

I retell this in details because some think all of the problems in the Church come from the Council, and others think it comes from society alone, but it was a concerted effort, a multi-front attack by their author Satan. The pill would have more likely been a Protestant phenomena had there been no corrupt theologians and priests convincing the Kennedys that Humanae Vitae could be ignored and remain Catholic. This is the seed of the sexual revolution.

It's also necessary to understand this did not immediately take off.  Doctors, Politicians, and Ministers took time to get on the band wagon but they did and then they spieled there poison to their women patients and Voila, the ball started rolling. By the late 60's early seventies the Colleges started handing them out so co-eds wouldn't get preggers. Younger Catholics, namely teenagers, when they became available to them jumped in, but older Catholics namely their older parents and brothers and sisters did not.

Mike Barnacle a Boston Newsman and an MSNBC regular on Imus related concerning the first time was with his fiancee just before their marriage after College and she became pregnant and that was the early seventies making him my age or a little bit younger.  In those days a young guy graduated from HS was considered a young man, and I saw with my own eyes the younger boomers all change with this pill. It was an epidemic. It was the cause of the summer of love in San Francisco. It was the cause of runaways to the Big cities. It is the root cause of black on black slaughter.

I rest my case.

tim

(07-19-2013, 02:30 PM)dark lancer Wrote: [ -> ]
(07-17-2013, 10:33 PM)Philosoraptor Wrote: [ -> ]My experience is that the most passionate defenders of the pro-life cause have all been women, and the most vehement defenders of abortion have been men.

I figure this is accurate because men would be obligated to 18 years of child support for a child they didn't want.

Unless of coarse they could find other ways around this (which they can) and if states did not have the resources to prosecute them. I don't think a woman would want to spend 18 years of doing the manual labor after birth to raise a child either (i.e. changing diapers, pottie training, taxiing, homework, etc). Adoption is always an option so the 18 years is not necessarily a life sentence.

(07-19-2013, 02:45 PM)Tim Wrote: [ -> ]The in depth on this is back when Paul went to Jerusalem to confront Peter to his face on the pagan's food and the Judaizers, some unknown Catholic Scribe wrote down some of what went on among them. There is scholarly attempts at who was there including James the Just the first Bishop of Jerusalem, but in that account named the Didache is a warning against using the pharmaceuticals concocted by pagan temple whores and priestesses for the purpose of abortion and contraception.
This has been with us from day one, but, and it's the big but, it took us until 64-65 to make a pill that worked and didn't kill the woman too.

I retell this in details because some think all of the problems in the Church come from the Council, and others think it comes from society alone, but it was a concerted effort, a multi-front attack by their author Satan. The pill would have more likely been a Protestant phenomena had there been no corrupt theologians and priests convincing the Kennedys that Humanae Vitae could be ignored and remain Catholic. This is the seed of the sexual revolution.

It's also necessary to understand this did not immediately take off.  Doctors, Politicians, and Ministers took time to get on the band wagon but they did and then they spieled there poison to their women patients and Voila, the ball started rolling. By the late 60's early seventies the Colleges started handing them out so co-eds wouldn't get preggers. Younger Catholics, namely teenagers, when they became available to them jumped in, but older Catholics namely their older parents and brothers and sisters did not.

Mike Barnacle a Boston Newsman and an MSNBC regular on Imus related concerning the first time was with his fiancee just before their marriage after College and she became pregnant and that was the early seventies making him my age or a little bit younger.  In those days a young guy graduated from HS was considered a young man, and I saw with my own eyes the younger boomers all change with this pill. It was an epidemic. It was the cause of the summer of love in San Francisco. It was the cause of runaways to the Big cities. It is the root cause of black on black slaughter.

I rest my case.

tim

A case well stated Tim! Thanks for sharing. You've got some really good insight.
(07-17-2013, 09:56 PM)divinesilence80 Wrote: [ -> ]I am often turned off by women like the author that dump responsibility of the issue so severely and totally on men. I think these kind of women do more harm than good because they create a strawman and verbally attack like there is no tomorrow. Men certainly play a role in this wickedness but seeing women as just hapless victims is totally unjust. When I read garbage like this, the last thing it inspires me to do is rally to the cause. In fact it encourages me to distance myself because the argument is weak / faulty / inaccurate generalization.

What do you all think?

It takes sperm to make babies and sperm comes from men, so if we want to end abortion then we need to target men.  The author is taking issue with one particular man, Ben Sherman, and any men who think like him.  The author is a woman who is prolife, Catholic, and homeschools her children.  Sounds like some members of this forum. 
Yes, there are women out there who act just as stupidly as men do when it comes to sexual gratification, and there are more women like that than most of us think. However, historically speaking many men have not taken responsibility for where they put their sperm. She is going after the prime target in the prolife cause.  Sounds smart to me.
Just to give some background information, I am a married man and have grown children, and I'm old enough to be your father.  It would be an ideal world if more men were as responsible as you sound. 
Pages: 1 2 3 4