Abortion is Good in the United States but Bad in China

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 26th, 2014

Week in Review

Advanced economies with expansive welfare states are incurring large budget deficits and growing national debt.  Why?  Because of birth control.  And abortion.

These massive welfare states were implemented before the Sixties.  When people were having more babies than they are now.  Following World War II there was a baby boom.  Following the baby boom, though, there was a baby bust.  Fast forward to today and a lot of those baby boomers are leaving the workforce and collecting taxpayer-financed benefits in retirement.  While the smaller baby bust generation is paying the taxes for those benefits.  Resulting in less money going into the welfare state than is going out in benefits.  Giving those deficits.  And that growing national debt.

A declining birthrate is the death knell of a welfare state.  So if you want a healthy welfare state you need people to have more babies.  So each generation is bigger than the one before it.  So there is always more money going into the welfare state than is going out.  Allowing the state to pay for those generous benefits without going bankrupt.

So birth control and abortion can bankrupt advanced economies with generous welfare states.  But abortion can do something else (see One-Child Policy Is One Big Problem for China by Susan Scutti posted 1/23/2014 on Newsweek).

Late last year, China’s National People’s Congress eased the one-child policy. The government didn’t exactly admit it was a mistake; according to Chinese officials, the guidelines helped avert 400 million births and in so doing, accelerated modernization…

Enforcement of the one-child policy during the early 1980s was controversial not only in China but around the globe. Early stories emerging from the rural villages focused on coercive practices, including forced late-term abortions and involuntary sterilization, as well as the “neighborly” snitching on pregnant couples who dared to conceive a second child…

…In China, there are currently 32 million more boys under the age of 20 than girls.

Medical advancements and technology have played a key role in creating this surplus of boys. “The Chinese government contracted with GE to provide cart-mounted ultrasound that could be run on generators so that the most obscure village had access to fetal sex determination,” said Hudson. Given the ability to know the sex of their unborn children, many parents aborted female fetuses…

It appears that the outraged cries from within and without have been heard. The Chinese government has spent millions of dollars in recent years to fund research into the implications of this radical skew in gender population numbers.

Having more men than women has led to a lot of single men who want to marry but can’t.  As there are not enough women to match up with men.  Which has caused a lot of these men to turn to prostitutes.  Something human traffickers are more than happy to supply them with.  Sending women there from neighboring countries to work in the sex industry.

The world is outraged over the number of aborted female fetuses in China.  Including the American left.  Yet they have no problem with abortion.  Aborting female fetuses is wrong.  But aborting male AND female fetuses is fine.  Apparently.  As abortion is sacred to those on the left.  Just mention that you want to revisit Roe v. Wade and see them go apoplectic.  For that is settled law.  And anyone who wants to take away a woman’s right to have an abortion is waging a war on women.  While in China abortion itself is the war on women.  So on the one hand abortion is the great liberator of women (outside of China).  While on the other hand it is the great exterminator of women (inside of China).  So it’s both good and bad.  When you use the imaginary logic of liberals, that is.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Mom and Dad get a Big Assist from MTV in the Battle against Teen Pregnancy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 18th, 2014

Week in Review

Parents can’t tell their kids anything.  For they know everything.  Thankfully for parents they got a little help from MTV.  Who kids will listen to even when they won’t listen to their parents (see Study: US reality shows contributed to record decline in teen pregnancy by Nicholas Tufnell, wired.co.uk, posted 1/13/2014 on ars technica).

A study from Wellesley College and the University of Maryland finds that MTV’s Teen Mom and 16 and Pregnant contributed to a record decline in US teen pregnancy…

In an effort to find the “causal effect of specific media content on teen childbearing rates,” Kearney and Levine began an empirical investigation by studying Nielsen ratings (a US audience measurement system) as well as data, trends and metrics from Google and Twitter. The researchers then examined the impact on teen birth rates using Vital Statistics Natality microdata.

The figures revealed that Teen Mom and 16 and Pregnant often had extremely high ratings and a very dedicated following, causing many to search and discuss the themes explored on the shows. Specifically, searches and tweets on birth control and abortion spiked each time the show was broadcast, particularly in areas where it was popular.

Teen abortion rates also fell over this period, which Levine and Kearney see as further evidence that the shows are partly responsible for a reduction in pregnancies.

How about that?  MTV got something many have failed to do.  To get kids to listen to their parents.  For the fall in teen pregnancies AND the fall in teen abortions means one of two things.  Either kids acting irresponsibly in spreading STDs with active sex lives got more responsible when it came to birth control.  Or they are just having less sex.  Like Mom and Dad would have tried everything within their powers to get them to do.  And here’s a television show that Mom and Dad no doubt couldn’t stand tipping that argument in their favor.  Thank you MTV.  For telling our kids that Mom and Dad were right all along.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , ,

The Democrats War on Women makes Women Dissatisfied with their Vaginas

Posted by PITHOCRATES - January 5th, 2014

Week in Review

Some people with big noses get nose jobs.  To reduce the size of their noses.  Pretty much the first thing you look at when you see someone with a big schnoz.  So one can understand the anxiety some people may suffer after a life of undo attention on their proboscis.  And a lifetime being called ‘big nose’.

Women are especially prone to getting plastic surgery to correct what they view as defects.  A tummy tuck so they look slimmer and more appealing.  Face lifts so they look younger and more appealing.  Boob jobs.  For a bigger rack to give the guys something to look at.  And to look more appealing.  In fact, anything that men see a lot they want to use surgery to make it look more appealing.  Even things that take some disrobing to see (see Designer vaginas are ruining our idea of what women’s bodies should look like, doctors warn by Anna Hodgekiss posted 12/31/2013 on the Daily Mail).

Women are getting increasingly distorted ideas of what their genitalia should look like, with many wrongly thinking their bodies are ‘abnormal’.

New research has found that those who looked at ‘designer vaginas’ were more more [sic] likely to consider them ‘normal’ and ‘ideal’ when later comparing them to unaltered genitalia…

The number of labiaplasties performed by the NHS has risen five-fold since 2001, according to the study’s Australian authors.

The surgery involves reducing the size of a woman’s labia minora to make them more symmetrical and smaller than the labia majora…

Generally, there are no health reasons to have the surgery – it is only for the sake of appearance. So the researchers wanted to know what drives women’s perceptions of what looks good…

‘This is due to airbrushing, lack of exposure to normal women’s genitals, greater genital visibility due to Brazilian and genital waxing and the general taboo around discussing genitals and genital appearance…’

Sarah Calabrese, a clinical psychologist at Yale University, added: ‘[These findings are] especially disconcerting given that for many women, the narrow and unrealistic range of vulvas presented in mainstream U.S. pornography may be the only images that they see,’ she said.

‘The vulva is unlike most other body parts, which remain visible even when clothed; while a woman can look around and see the size and shape of other women’s waists, breasts, and so on, they don’t have the same opportunity to view other women’s vulvas and therefore are less likely to have a realistic sense of the natural diversity of vulvas in the female population.’

The Democrats/liberals keep saying Republicans/conservatives have a war on women.  Because they don’t want to hand out free birth control.  And provide access to abortion.  While Democrats do everything within their power to make it easier for a woman to go out and have a lot of casual sex.  Apparently liberals everywhere are, too.  Turning women into such sexual objects that they watch pornography to see how men want a vagina to look.  And then have surgery to get their vagina to look like what would please a connoisseur of pornography.  Yet it’s Republicans/conservatives that have a war on women.

But the bigger question is why are women trying to make every part of their body so appealing?  Well, who finds women appealing?  That’s right.  Men.  And why do women look their best for men?  To attract a guy.  And it’s just not for a hookup (i.e., casual sex).  For there probably isn’t a guy who would refuse to have sex with a woman after getting her naked regardless of what her vagina looked like.  For if a guy is looking at a woman’s vagina he’s probably thinking it’s the most beautiful thing he’s ever seen.  Because he’s about to have sex.  And nothing short of an earthquake or a tornado is going to get him to say anything that might spoil the mood.

No.  Women try to attract men to find Mr. Right.  For despite the Democrat war on women with their free birth control and access to abortion to keep them free and single women want to get married.  They don’t want to live alone.  Just being sexual objects for men to enjoy.  So desperate to find Mr. Right they will go to any length to make their looks ideal.  Based on pornographic images.  Something else Democrats fight to protect.  For there probably isn’t a pornographer out there that votes Republican.  Yet it’s Republicans/conservatives that have a war on women.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Democrats attack Christianity while Remaining Mute as Islam Brutally Oppresses Women

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 21st, 2013

Week in Review

The left keeps saying that the Republicans have a war on women.  Because they are a bunch of Christian extremist who want to take away birth control and abortion from women.  They take every opportunity to attack Christianity as the great oppressor of women.  Warning women of the hell they’ll be subjected to if we elect Republicans with their Christian agenda.  But they will never say anything about the oppression of women under Islam.  Which is very real (see Afghan woman flown to Turkey after husband ‘slices off her nose’ by Rob Crilly, Islamabad, and Zubair Babakarkhail posted 12/18/2013 on The Telegraph).

An Afghan woman has been flown to Turkey for emergency surgery after her husband sliced off her nose and lips apparently in punishment for refusing to sell her jewellery.

Sitara, 30, was found lying unconscious in her home on Friday when neighbours in Herat province were alerted by the cries of her four children.

The attack has been seized on by women’s rights campaigners as evidence that not enough is being done to protect fragile progress made since the Taliban was ousted from power in 2001…

Her mother Naseema said he was addicted to heroin and had regularly beaten her daughter in the past for failing to give birth to a son. On Friday evening she said he asked her daughter – who was engaged at the age of 11 – for money and then demanded her gold ring when she said she had no cash.

“She told him that this ring was given to her by her father – Azim did not buy it for her,” she said.

He turned violent, knocking the mother-of-four unconscious with a rock collected from outside before taking a knife to her nose and top lip, said Naseema. It was all witnessed by her four young daughters, aged three to 12…

A United Nations paper published earlier this month showed reported violence against women was on the rise – an increase of 28% in the past year.

In November, officials floated the idea of reintroducing stoning for the adultery before quickly withdrawing it amid an international outcry.

If anyone has a war on women it’s Islam.  Some will say these are isolated incidences and don’t represent the true Islamic faith.  But these isolated incidences far outnumber the zero number of Christians cutting off women’s noses and lips.  Or stoning women for adultery.  But you never hear the left who is supposedly fighting for women in the war on women express the same level of outrage over these abuses of Islam that they reserve for Christians.  All they do is help Islam attack Christianity.  Making Islam’s power greater.  Putting more women at risk for these horrible abuses.

Will Democrats ever put their politics aside to protect women from real dangers?  Or will they continue to exploit women for their politics?  And create phantom dangers where none exist?  As they will sacrifice anything for their insatiable quest for power?

Women are oppressed by Islam and they remain silent.  Calling Christianity the real danger.  Which is more tolerant of birth control, abortion (and homosexuality) than Islam is by far.  But they attack Christianity.  And not Islam.  Because the enemy of my enemy is my friend.  Even though this ‘friend’ will oppress them in a heartbeat if given the chance.  For Democrats may like Islam because they annoy Christians but Muslims hate everything liberals stand for.  And would prefer to eradicate them like all enemies of Islam.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Women will be able to be more Enlightened and Modern in Canada with Legalized Prostitution

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 21st, 2013

Week in Review

The left everywhere in the world fights back against the Old World Puritanism of conservatives.   Who want to do nothing but oppress women in monogamous marriages.  Where a man pledges to have and behold from this day on, for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish; until death do us part.  Need one say anymore to prove that there is a war on women?  Just imagine the difficulty of placing the wedding band on the sloped-brow Neanderthal she’s marrying.  Having to lift those scarred knuckles up from the floor.  That he just dragged across the floor to get to the altar.

It’s a frightening image.  Marriage.  A man pledging his undying love to a woman.  You can see why the left rails against such an archaic view of women.  For unlike conservatives liberals liberate women.  They give them birth control and abortion.  So a woman can go from man to man with the frequency of a cheap ham radio (a line borrowed from the Saturday Night Live Point Counter Point sketch with Jane Curtain and Dan Aykroyd).  This is the modern woman the left wants.  A sexual being.  To be enjoyed sexually.  Not oppressed in a monogamous marriage.  Where she’ll never be able to enjoy true freedom.  Like this (see Push is on for strip clubs to take advantage of Supreme Court ruling on prostitution by Daniel Proussalidis posted 12/21/2013 on the Toronto Sun).

Strip clubs smell dollars and opportunity on the heels of a Supreme Court of Canada decision Friday to strike down key Criminal Code provisions.

The Adult Entertainment Association of Canada says it’s ready to provide “enhanced” services once brothels become legal in Canada…

Women’s activist Diane Watts says she’s not surprised to see this push now that the Supreme Court has ruled Canada’s bans on brothels, communicating for the purpose of prostitution and living off its profits are unconstitutional…

Instead of new laws, Lambrinos’s group says strip clubs that are already regulated by cities quality for “enhanced licences” to allow them to offer more than naked people and lap dances.

Watts says fully legalized prostitution will mean higher demand for hookers and “increased trafficking from countries where women are more vulnerable.”

A 2010 RCMP human trafficking threat assessment found strip clubs are already part of the problem.

“Exotic dance clubs, or strip clubs, have been associated with human trafficking of foreign nationals in Canada since the late 1990s, when the number of migrant dancers from Eastern Europe increased dramatically,” said the assessment.

Little girls dream of ponies.  Prince Charming carrying her away.  And fairytale weddings.  Where a man pledges to have and behold from this day on, for better or for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish; until death do us part.  Not to grow up to dance naked in a strip bar one day to entertain men.  Or to earn a living prostituting themselves as they pleasure men.  And no parent raising their daughter ever hoped that she will be able to dance naked one day for the entertainment of men.  Or to prostitute herself to pleasure men.  Not even liberals.  Yet they will create the world that makes this possible.  And likely.  For stripping and prostitution offers a way for single mothers to make a lot of money in the short working hours they have available around raising their kids.  Something else no little girl dreamed about in her childhood.

Anyone suggesting women should withhold their most intimate selves until their wedding night will be called prudes.  Anyone who urges that women at least enter monogamous relationships with someone who wants more than a one-night stand (aka a hookup) will also be called a prude.  So these young women will be sexually active.  Giving away their most intimate selves to men who think of them as only sexual objects.  Because it’s fun.  And the left has them believing that they are being enlightened and modern and so unlike their prudish parents by objectifying themselves to pleasure as many men as possible.

Yet it’s the conservatives who have a war on women.  Go figure.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

FT201: “War on women? Seems more like a war on men if you ask me.” —Old Pithy

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 20th, 2013

Fundamental Truth

Today Men smoke Marlboro Cigarettes to connect to that Rugged Cowboy on the Billboards

If you had parents or grandparents who lived through the Great Depression and World War II you’ve probably noticed something about them.  They were a hardy breed.  Especially the men.  Sure, we all know someone who changed the oil in their own car.  But back then it wasn’t uncommon to change the sparkplugs, shock absorbers, exhaust system, brakes, ball joints, etc.  They even bought new tires and put them onto the rims themselves.  As well as fixing everything that needed repair around the house.  From the furnace to the toilet to the garbage disposal to installing a new roof on the house.

And all of this after they got home from work.  Or on the weekend after cutting, edging, fertilizing and watering the grass.  So the grass was lush and green for the kids to play on with Dad.  When he wasn’t teaching them to ride a bike.  How to protect themselves in a fight.  Or helping them with their science project.  Getting so involved that their kids turned in things they knew their teachers must have known they didn’t build themselves.  But that’s how it was back then.  There was nothing too complex or too difficult that Dad couldn’t roll up his sleeves and do.  Sure, there may have been some cuss words.  But that rugged can-do attitude forged in the fires of the Great Depression and World War II provided a feeling of safety and comfort in the home whenever Dad was there.  As Dad was both provider and protector.

Today men smoke Marlboro cigarettes to connect to that rugged cowboy on the billboards.  Back then they were that cowboy.  Tough men who volunteered to fight in World War II.  The last time that this type of American man was the rule and not the exception.  But after the war the size of government grew.  With the least manly men of all, liberals, leading the way.  Bringing out the softer and more feminine side of men.  Men who cry.  And explore their feelings.  Eating quiche instead of steak.  Diluting the manliness in them.  As any form of manliness became a socially undesirable trait.

The Left’s Objectification of Women cause Men to Linger in Adolescence instead of Growing Up and Maturing

It started with the Sexual Revolution.  When we went from a family-centered society to one that viewed the idea of family itself as oppression.  Women were encouraged to be sexual things instead of a wife and mother.  Birth control and abortion made it possible to enjoy the sexual favors of a woman without being in a committed relationship.  So men did.  Using women to satisfy their lust.  And only for that.  Allowing women to go on to build a career.  While men began to degenerate into a state of permanent adolescence.  Being that young man who has but one thought on his mind all of the time.

Exit the cowboy.   And enter the government.  LBJ gave us the Great Society.  And Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC).  Giving rise to absentee fathers.  And single mothers raising their children alone in government-built public housing.  For the provider and protector left the household.  As the government stepped in to take over that role.  And did a horrible job.  Destroying inner-city families.  As crime-ridden public housing pushed these fatherless boys into gangs.  And drugs.  Which migrated to and infected their schools like a cancer.  Boys who grew up seeing the new normal.  Women are only for sexual pleasure.  Not marrying and raising a family with.  As their children followed the same path.  Growing up without a father.  With the state being provider and protector.  Poorly, of course.

As men lingered in their adolescence they never fully grew up and matured.  The very people who are responsible for this—the liberal left—blamed men for their brutishness.  Saying it was the natural state of man.  And soon made the very act of responding to the attractiveness of a woman as a form of sexual harassment.  The government provides free birth control and access to abortion so women can be as sexually active as possible.  The left attacks the censors and pushes the boundaries on television and in the movies.  Today broadcast television shows often carry warnings like “Strong Coarse Language” and “Intensely Suggestive Dialogue.”  Sexual imagery bombards us.  For sex sells.  It even sells sex on broadcast television.  Such as the Victoria Secret Fashion Show.  With beautiful models dressed only in underwear strut across the catwalk for one purpose.  To bring attention to their sexual parts that their sexy underwear barely covers.  So they can sell their lingerie to spice up sex in the bedroom.  They do all of this and yet attack men as being primeval and brutish when they make inappropriate comments to women.  Such as “You’re looking lovely today.”

The Archetypical Young Man Today is a bespectacled Man-Boy in a Plaid Pajama Onesie Sipping a Hot Chocolate

It’s a confusing world today.  Women are encouraged to look as beautiful as ever while men aren’t supposed to notice.  Liberals encourage them to explore their sexuality while they condemn men for wanting to enjoy that sexuality.  Pulling them even further away from marriage and family as they turn to the world of online pornography.  Further objectifying the already objectified woman.  But in cyberspace men know their advances won’t be construed as sexual harassment.  Social media even pulls the sexes further apart.  Often the only time they get together is for sex.  The Japanese young are even turning away from sex.  As the cost of living in their nanny state is so great they don’t want to be burdened with the high cost of raising a family.  Not surprisingly, life-like sex robots are a reality now in Japan.  And elsewhere.

The left has been marginalizing the role of men in today’s society.  They get women in as many male roles as possible.  Even in the brutal sport of boxing.  Which exemplifies man’s brutish nature.  But celebrates the advancement of women in a male-dominated society.  Even same-sex marriage further and subtly diminishes the role of man as the head of the household and provider and protector of the family.  By equating the sexes.  A man can have a husband or a wife.  And a woman can have a wife or a husband.  Advancing the idea of the obsolescence of man in traditional male roles.  As President Obama’s Life of Julia showed how the government can be the provider and protector for women from 3 to 67.  And the recent ad to get the young invincibles to sign up for Obamacare.  Showing what the left considers to be the archetypical young man today.  A bespectacled man-boy wearing a plaid pajama onesie while sipping a hot chocolate.  A far cry from the rugged manliness of the Marlboro Man.

Is this the ideal man women want?  Is this the man that can put a new tire on a rim?  Is this the man that can win a world war?  Is this man going to make anyone feel safe and protected?  For when it comes to raising a family who do you want as father?  Bespectacled pajama man-boy?  Or the Marlboro Man?  Paula Cole put this well in a song during the Nineties (see Where have all the cowboys gone).

Where is my John Wayne
Where is my prairie son
Where is my happy ending
Where have all the cowboys gone…

Where is my Marlboro man
Where is his shiny gun
Where is my lonely ranger
Where have all the cowboys gone

And we have a war on women?  Seems more like a war on men if you ask me.  And, sadly, it’s one men are losing.  Sad for both men and women.  And the nation.  As real men are now the exception now and not the rule.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Liberals’ War on Women is Causing Women and Teenage Girls to have Genital Cosmetic Surgery

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 15th, 2013

Week in Review

A large part in Mitt Romney’s loss to President Obama in the 2012 presidential election was the Republicans’ so-called war on women.  All started by that question from George Stephanopoulos.  If Mitt Romney wanted to take women’s birth control away.  Completely out of the blue.  Something never included in any Republican platform.

But from that question the mantra on the left was if you elect conservatives they will take away a woman’s birth control and her access to abortion.  Which, according to the left, is the only thing women care about.  Using their vaginas.  And with this emphasis on vaginas women are going to great lengths to make their vaginas as pretty as possible (see British gynaecologists express shock over five-fold rise in female genital cosmetic surgery cases by Agence France-Presse posted 11/16/2013 on South China Morning Post).

British gynaecologists warned yesterday that increasing numbers of teenage girls and women are undergoing genital cosmetic surgery, driven in part by unrealistic images of how they should look based on pornography.

You can’t blame pornography on conservatives.  That’s something the left says is a free speech issue.  The objectification and exploitation of women.  Liberals say that there is nothing wrong with women being sexy.  And fight any attempts to censor television.  Or the movies.  What harm can come from consenting adults enjoying a women’s nudity?  Or enjoying her sexual objectification?  Well, as it turns out, it’s not just men using pornography as the standard for women.  Women are, too.  Even teenage girls.

Yet it’s conservatives who have a war on women.  Go figure.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Apparently Women don’t mind being Objectified as long as it is for Something Luxurious

Posted by PITHOCRATES - December 7th, 2013

Week in Review

Sex sells.  And women sell sex.  Apparently (see Women Hate Sexually Explicit Ads, Unless They’re Selling Something Expensive by Katy Waldman posted 12/5/2013 on Slate).

According to researchers led by the University of Minnesota’s Kathleen Vohs, women find erotically charged ads less distasteful when they promote very expensive items. We like our objectification classed up, thank you…

The researchers explain their findings by way of sexual economics theory, which treats the heterosexual dating pool as a marketplace and sex as a commodity. The story goes that since women sell sex to men in exchange for resources—including hard-to-quantify ones like attention—they want the world to perceive their eroticized bodies as “rare and precious.” Ads that link female sexuality to exclusive, high-value goods help; ads that equate a woman’s erotic charms to a cheapo Casio timepiece obviously do not. “Using sexual images to promote an inexpensive product fosters undesirable associations between sex and cheapness, commonness, or low value, which is antithetical to women’s preferences about how sex should be understood,” the authors write.

There was an episode of Scrubs where Carla and Eliot (best gal pals) were talking about sex.  The conversation veered into a night of sex between Carla and her husband.  Eliot said something like, “You didn’t do that, did you?”  And Carla replied, “Of course not.  I’m saving that for something nice.  Like a tennis bracelet.”  Of course, the that they were talking about was anal sex.  Something a lot of men want.  But not their ladies.  Unless they can get something real nice in exchange, that is.  Like a tennis bracelet.

Apparently life imitates art.  Women do sell sex.  As long as it’s for something really nice.  Something as rare and precious as their sexual goods.  Perhaps this why Ted Night’s wife was so offended when Rodney Dangerfield said, “You’re a lot of woman, you know that? Yeah, wanna make 14 dollars the hard way?” in Caddyshack.  Perhaps if he had offered to buy her a villa in Tuscany she would have been flattered.

Maybe this is why the Democrats are such advocates of free birth control and access to abortion.  For the economics of it.  For a lady being with child must discount her sexual goods in the left’s eyes.  Making them less ‘rare and precious’ as, say, a lingerie model.  How the left like their women.  Based on how they’ve sexualized them (all that birth control and abortion helps keep them barren and sexual).  And an inconvenient/untimely pregnancy could be the difference between a cheapo Casio timepiece and a luxurious 18 carat gold Cartier chronometer.  The kind of gift rich men buy their lingerie model girlfriends who are young enough to be their daughters.  Which is the price these old men must pay to enjoy their sexual goods.

Of course this begs the question if their sexual goods are so ‘rare and precious’ why do they give then away so much that they need birth control and abortion?  The whole concept of ‘hooking up’ makes a woman’s sexual goods anything but rare.  If it’s a smorgasbord for men out there that makes these sexual goods cheapo Casio timepieces.  For when they meet at a party on campus no one is giving a woman a luxurious 18 carat gold Cartier chronometer for a roll on some stranger’s unmade bed.  Actually, it’s the monogamous married woman who has the rare and precious goods.  Because only one person has access to them.  Making them the ultimate ‘must have’ that no one can.  What some misogynist and hedonistic men prize above all others.  Bedding the elusive married women.  The ultimate forbidden fruit.  A prim and proper lady.

This is what the left prefers.  Less lady-like behavior and more overt sexuality.  Casual sex with multiple partners.  Reducing women to their sexual goods.  While Republicans prefer marriage and monogamy.  And yet it’s the Republicans that have a war on women.  Go figure.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Birth Control and Abortion a factor in Premature Births

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 24th, 2013

Week in Review

Mitt Romney lost the 2012 election in part because of the Republican ‘war on women’.  Which started when George Stephanopoulos asked Mitt Romney out of the blue if he wanted to take away women’s birth control.  The next thing we knew there were women who said college girls couldn’t afford their birth control and needed the state to buy it for them.  Then this snowballed into Republicans wanted their women barefoot and pregnant.  And were going to turn the hands of the clock back to 1950 for women everywhere if Mitt Romney won the election.  The left warned women that this was the worst thing that could happen to them.  For they knew what women wanted.  Birth control.  And abortion.  So their lives could revolve around their vaginas.  Becoming sexual objects.  To please a lot of different men.  While avoiding the disease of pregnancy.

As it turns out, though, avoiding the disease of pregnancy could have some side effects (see Premature baby steroids ‘may raise risk of ADHD’ by James Gallagher posted 11/22/2013 on BBC News Health).

Steroids given to help premature babies develop may also be slightly increasing the risk of mental health disorders, say researchers…

Being born too soon can lead to long-term health problems and the earlier the birth the greater the problems.

One immediate issue is the baby’s lungs being unprepared to breathe air. Steroids can help accelerate lung development.

However, the study by researchers at Imperial College London and the University of Oulu in Finland showed the drugs may also be affecting the developing brain.

A premature baby has a lot more health risks than one carried to term.  We’re doing things after the birth to help these children.  Is there anything we can do to help before the birth.  Well, we can try to reduce the number of premature babies.  So what exactly causes babies to be born premature?  According to the Mayo Clinic (see Premature birth) there may be a lot of factors including but not limited to the following.  Smoking cigarettes, drinking alcohol or using illicit drugs.  Some infections, particularly of the amniotic fluid and lower genital tract.  Some chronic conditions, such as high blood pressure and diabetes.  Multiple miscarriages or abortions.

There are other risks.  But what’s interesting about these risks is that they grow greater with age.  A married woman having her children in her twenties will have smoked fewer cigarettes, drank less alcohol and used fewer illicit drugs than a woman in her thirties or forties.  She will have had a less active sex life which will reduce the number of infections in her lower genital tract.  She will be less likely to have high blood pressure or diabetes than a woman 10-20 years older than her.  And she may have fewer abortions than a woman who waits until she is in her forties to start her family.  For these reasons women having a baby when they are over 35 have a greater risk of having a premature birth.

Whenever there is another gun death the left says we need new gun control legislation.  To take guns away from law-abiding gun owners.  Even if it saves just one life.  Well, we can have more healthy babies if women choose to get married and start their families while in their twenties.  For it is what’s best for the children.  Instead of trying to have a career first and then start a family later in life.  And perhaps more would if the left wasn’t telling women that a woman should be strong, independent, enjoy her sexuality and use free birth control and abortion to avoid what they call the disease of pregnancy.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

The Left will give you Birth Control, Access to Abortion and will even Notify your Sex Partners if you gave them an STI

Posted by PITHOCRATES - November 17th, 2013

Week in Review

Mitt Romney lost the 2012 election in large part to this war on women the right is supposedly waging.  Because they don’t want to provide free birth control.  And abortion on demand.  You see, the Democrats understood what the Republicans do not.  Women have vaginas.  And they want to use them.  Apparently.  As nothing else mattered in the campaign.  Not the worst economic recovery since that following the Great Depression.  Not the scandals (Fast and Furious, Benghazi, AP snooping, James Rosen snooping, Attorney General Eric Holder possible perjury over James Rosen snooping, NSA snooping, IRS harassing conservatives, etc.).  Not the disastrous foreign policy (helping the Muslim Brotherhood take Egypt, helping al Qaeda move into Libya, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, etc.). 

No.  Apparently women have no interest in these things.  Only their vaginas matter to them.  At least, that’s what the left would have you believe.  And they’re using them so much there is an explosion in sexual transmitted infections (see “I’m Calling to Let You Know That You May Have Been Exposed to Gonorrhea” by Amanda Marcotte posted 11/14/2013 on Slate).

In the annals of uncomfortable conversations that most people hope never to have, “calling your exes to tell them you have an STI” ranks at least in the top five. Luckily, for the taxpaying citizens of eastern Washington, help is on the way. As reported by NPR, the Spokane Regional Health District has instituted a program where, if you test positive for a sexually transmitted infection, their social workers will do the hard work of finding your former sex partners and calling them to let them know they’ve been exposed to this disease…

This program is fantastic and needs to be instituted everywhere immediately. This is a clear-cut example of the taxpayers really getting their money’s worth from government programs…

All jokes aside, infectious diseases don’t care if you’ve reached a point of emotional maturity where you can tackle life’s more difficult conversations with aplomb. Having a third party make the phone call you may not be able to make yourself is a simple, effective way of preventing people who may have infectious diseases from infecting more people. Half of new STI infections are among Americans ages 15-24, an age where having these kinds of loaded conversations is especially difficult. Good for Spokane, and let’s hope this program spreads across the country faster than chlamydia.

With the left’s objectification of women the hook-up entered the American lexicon.  Meeting people for casual sex.  With no consequences.  Thanks to free birth control.  And should that fail, abortion.  Kids as young as 15 are hooking up.  And leading the explosion in STIs.  No doubt young boys driving the explosion.  As they have but one thing on their mind.  Getting as many girls to say ‘yes’ as possible.  Because with free birth control and abortion there are no consequences.  So they try to convince every girl they find attractive to have sex.  Possibly infecting many of them before they show any symptoms themselves.  Which they probably ignore long before finally going to a doctor.  As those they infected may have unknowingly spread the infection through other hook-ups.

Is a government notification system of STIs really the answer?  Or is that only treating the symptom and not the cause?  Instead of spreading infection to our young perhaps we should follow George Michael‘s advice.  And explore monogamy.  And let our women be more than sexual objects.  As the left apparently prefers them.  Instead have only one sexual partner to live a sexually fulfilling life with.  For if they both enter the relationship infection free there will be no infection later.  And no need to have the government call your sexual partners.

www.PITHOCRATES.com

Share

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

« Previous Entries   Next Entries »