For decades (forever!), abstinence has been the best way to avoid unwanted pregnancy. If you are not having sex, your odds of getting pregnant decline precipitously. It’s true. But the Left, in general, and progressive feminists have objected to suggesting the practice.
And abstinence education is scorned by the left, its support and funding opposed as misleading and dangerous. So, what is this, then?
“If you’re a man who won’t get a vasectomy, even though it’s reversible, and you’re not out in the streets fighting for my rights, you do not deserve to have sex with me,” Brianna Campbell, a 24-year-old EMT, told The Post. …
“I think it’s absolutely valid for us to be withholding the Holy Grail that men seem to think is important,” she told The Post at an abortion protest in Manhattan’s Union Square.
That sounds like abstinence to me.
Celibacy is about to become popular 😁#sexstrike pic.twitter.com/DhAMRhjC1W
— VICTORY (@kaur_jeeto) June 26, 2022
So, the solution to the problem of the “right” to abortion is eliminating the odds you’ll get pregnant. I say go for it but I have doubts about the suggestion that women who stop having sex with legislators will have any effect.
The married ones are, in a high proportion (with rare exceptions), married to or with people who agree that Roe was a badly written and poorly thought-out decision. They’ve no objection to the Feds getting out of the bedroom and leaving that up to the several states.
But, by all means, stop having sex with Democrat legislators until they fix it, whatever “it” is, and thanks for embracing an idea that the Left has rejected for longer than Roe has been a decision in need of being overturned.
Abstinence.
Exit question: If they are radical feminists, do they really need to try to be abstinent?
