Log In

Home
    - Create Journal
    - Update
    - Download

LiveJournal
    - News
    - Paid Accounts
    - Contributors

Customize
    - Customize Journal
    - Create Style
    - Edit Style

Find Users
    - Random!
    - By Region
    - By Interest
    - Search

Edit ...
    - Personal Info &
      Settings
    - Your Friends
    - Old Entries
    - Your Pictures
    - Your Password

Developer Area

Need Help?
    - Lost Password?
    - Freq. Asked
      Questions
    - Support Area



Pan ([info]panthea) wrote in [info]wankitywank,
@ 2006-10-28 01:51:00


Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current mood:WTF?

"But maybe she shouldn't be having sex if it's life-threatening."
Fucksake, this hasn't even made it off [info]clairvoyantwank yet, and already the mice are bringing the HEADDESK.

Quick background: Biting Beaver had sex with her long-time male cohabitating personage. The condom broke. It took about three days before she found a place willing to give her EC. It didn't take. She had to get an abortion.

Oh, yeah: and HAVING ANOTHER CHILD COULD KILL HER.

We have: Snap judgments!
I don't know the background here, but why hasn't she gotten her tubes tied if another pregnancy could kill her? It just seems really irresponsible (to me) to rely on a condom alone in a situation like that.

Well-meaning advice!
But maybe she shouldn't be having sex if it's life-threatening.

Condescension ahoy!
There are plenty of ways to be sexually active with your partner that don't involve STICKING IT IN. For this woman, in her unique situation, sex is a very serious health risk that could KILL HER if she doesn't smarten up. Logically, she should either:

A) Avoid vaginal sex
-or-
B) Take extra steps to avoid getting pregnant

She's doing neither.


More-feminist-than-thou!
It was most likely a miscalculation on her part to continue that particular kind of penetrative sex at all. For a feminist who's supposed to be all in charge of her sexuality, she seems to have a limited idea about what constitutes letting her partner, "stick his dick in [her]." Whatever the case, I still stand by my original statement; Sodomy, yahy!

Is that BACKPEDALING I smell?
Nononononono! *backs away slowly* I'm not calling her a whore at all, I'm just saying that from reading her blog it seems she believes vaginal intercourse is the only viable form of penetration that she could achive in a sexual relationship. Really, I was advicating kinky sex and a more in-depth exploration of her sex and sexuality from a feminist POV. You know, turning tragedy into triumph and all that.

The moral of this story: if pregnancy could kill you, then no vaginal sex for you! Sodomy all the way!



(Read comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]black_spot
2006-11-01 07:52 pm UTC (link)
If we avoided everything that had a good chance of killing us, we'd all be trapped inside forever. The key is to take protection so that if you want to take a hike through the woods you can make it out of there okay without getting mauled by a bear.

Bit like Isaac Asimov’s ‘With Folded Hands.’ Written in 1948 and I can still see the nanny states directing us there.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)


[info]cmdr_zoom
2007-09-01 12:44 am UTC (link)
Jack Williamson, actually.

Asimov would never have written a story like that. He insisted (with what sometimes seems like charming naivete) that robots could never do anything wrong unless a human was involved somehow. Williamson's "Humanoids" stories and, to a fair degree, the recent movie which took its title from one of Asimov's works (I, Robot) are an explicit refutation of that idea, focusing on how one defines "harm."

Then again, it's not like the issue of giving up freedom for "safety" (or being forced to) is pure science fiction...

(Reply to this)(Parent)


(Read comments) -

 
   
Privacy Policy - COPPA
Legal Disclaimer - Site Map