@SkitchP wrote:I think initially the need for a script for it was based on the patriarchy. At this point however I do think it is, in large part, to make sure that they are educated on the (small) risks. If it was released today it probably wouldn't be RX only, but no need to really unrestrict it either.
There was a pretty hefty push in the very late 90's to change this, right around the time they were also pushing to improve female contraceptive care coverage by insurance companies. I'm not sure what hap
@SkitchP wrote:I think initially the need for a script for it was based on the patriarchy. At this point however I do think it is, in large part, to make sure that they are educated on the (small) risks. If it was released today it probably wouldn't be RX only, but no need to really unrestrict it either.
There was a pretty hefty push in the very late 90's to change this, right around the time they were also pushing to improve female contraceptive care coverage by insurance companies. I'm not sure what hap
Ugh. I don't have a dog in the fight either way. But conservative groups may be well served to LET it go OTC, it would cost more for the average woman without insurance picking up the tab, and the insurance companies would be thrilled as they probably couldn't be forced to cover it if across the board they dont cover things available OTC.
the article states: Warning: This story contains sexually explicit material that may be NSFW.
the text of it seems ok to me, but I haven't clicked any of the embedded links so- just an FYI
"No one cares, writes Erin Gloria Ryan at Jezebel, “because dudes want to make jerking off a social activity, and women aren't people."
I can't get away from the feeling that i'm actually helping promote this shit, but whatever, if this kind of stuff gets you off, see you in masculism hell, I guess...
Dev wrote:you're delusional. you are a sad sad person. fuck off. you're mentally ill beyond repair. i don't need your shit. dissapear.
simple schoolboy wrote:I thought I brought up trigger warnings, and yet we have that unfortunately traumatic Human Bass inspired thread. I had hoped this was a safe place.
(I'll drop the issue if you can convince me that Shakesville and it's ridiculous rule is not a fair representation of feminism)
simple schoolboy wrote:I thought I brought up trigger warnings, and yet we have that unfortunately traumatic Human Bass inspired thread. I had hoped this was a safe place.
(I'll drop the issue if you can convince me that Shakesville and it's ridiculous rule is not a fair representation of feminism)
simple schoolboy wrote:I thought I brought up trigger warnings, and yet we have that unfortunately traumatic Human Bass inspired thread. I had hoped this was a safe place.
(I'll drop the issue if you can convince me that Shakesville and it's ridiculous rule is not a fair representation of feminism)
What a weird thing to fixate on.
Anders wrote:I do not have a «neoliberal assessment of geopolitics», so please stop writing that I do.
simple schoolboy wrote:I thought I brought up trigger warnings, and yet we have that unfortunately traumatic Human Bass inspired thread. I had hoped this was a safe place.
(I'll drop the issue if you can convince me that Shakesville and it's ridiculous rule is not a fair representation of feminism)
My previous post of the series was about how emotional/sexual attachment to men (‘heterosexuality’) exists only within the context of OPPRESSION, GENOCIDE or globally organised violence against women by men as a class. Which means that this emotional bond to men can’t be anything else
I do kinda wonder if this is a community of very traumatized people, victims of abuse or terrible violence, and this is how they have learned to express and live with it. If that's the case I'm glad they have community, acceptance, and comfort. But it's just astounding to read.
My previous post of the series was about how emotional/sexual attachment to men (‘heterosexuality’) exists only within the context of OPPRESSION, GENOCIDE or globally organised violence against women by men as a class. Which means that this emotional bond to men can’t be anything else
I do kinda wonder if this is a community of very traumatized people, victims of abuse or terrible violence, and this is how they have learned to express and live with it. If that's the case I'm glad they have community, acceptance, and comfort. But it's just astounding to read.
Do you think it's doing them any good? They just feed each others detachment from reality in my opinion. Would you be surprised if any of these believers went postal?
Think I’m going to try being kind to everyone a chance.
My previous post of the series was about how emotional/sexual attachment to men (‘heterosexuality’) exists only within the context of OPPRESSION, GENOCIDE or globally organised violence against women by men as a class. Which means that this emotional bond to men can’t be anything else
I do kinda wonder if this is a community of very traumatized people, victims of abuse or terrible violence, and this is how they have learned to express and live with it. If that's the case I'm glad they have community, acceptance, and comfort. But it's just astounding to read.
Are we talking about feminism or RM?
Anders wrote:I do not have a «neoliberal assessment of geopolitics», so please stop writing that I do.
