Victory for the Ladies (those age 18+)

RainDog

VictoryGin wrote:

yes and no. plan b is generally a higher dose of the everyday OCP. if she just catches up with her own pills, it could be too late and that dose is not high enough. she would have to take more than 2 (but only using certain brands), so she might not have enough in her pill pack if she had the right kind to begin with. plan b is a lot easier to use because that is only two pills and you don't have to already be using a certain brand of pills.

Thanks for the information. Say the brand is Ortho Tri-Cyclin, she keeps an extra pack on hand for just such an occassion, and takes three of them --- Um, not that I'm, uh, speaking from experience or anything - but if I was, it would have happened long before this Plan B was cleared. Not that anything happened, mind you.

I agree that this Plan B contraceptive is the best way to go in emergency situations. It's definitely a victory, as you say. But - not that I'm speaking from experience, mind you - I'd say its a victory for everyone; not just the ladies.

RainDog

cornnifer wrote:

Trust me, this isn't it.
I have no problem with sex itself.

Well, that's good. I was starting to think you were a little strange.

hippiemom

cornnifer wrote:

It doesn't effect me personally. At least not directly. i've already stated this. And i'm not trying to be the "arbiter of morality" for anyone. I've been around here long enough, and you've read enough of my posts that i thought you would have known this by now. If thats what it comes down to, disagreement always being equal to an attempted forced morality, then why even have the train? i'm just stating opinions just like anyone else. Why is that so wrong? Sorry if my rational disagreement offends you.

Also, i've never claimed to be perfect. Far from it actually. i'm actually a real fucking loser. That doesn't exempt me from having opinions.

Sorry, but that's how it comes across. There's no debate about how you feel personally and what you do in your own life ... obviously, if you and your partner don't like this pill for whatever reason, you won't use it. The debate is about public policy, for or against this being available over the counter. And it certainly does come across as moralizing when you go on and on about the irresponsibility of using birth control after, rather than prior to, sex. And for someone who admits to making many mistakes (as we all have), it seems a bit harsh to say pregnancy and a lifetime of unwanted parenthood is what someone deserves for making what is, in your view, a poor decision.

It just astounds me that anyone could be opposed to a safe, effective method of birth control that will prevent abortions, not to mention providing peace of mind to millions of women. I was never promiscous, but I can think of a few times when this pill would have taken a load off my mind, to say the least. And if I had been promiscous, so what? It's no one's business but my own.

surferdude

even flow? wrote:

A quick comment: How come in this thread and others I have read. It seems to be when the word responsibility comes up it usually is refered to for the woman. It takes two to tango. The guy can bag it up just as easy as asking if she is protected. But the onus seems to be on the person who has to carry the "mistake" for nine months knowing full well that the guy in most cases if she has to go the way of the thread, won't be around. I would say it is up to her.

Well I've brought up repeatedly the absurdity of holding men fiscally responsible for a choice they have no say in.

even flow?

surferdude wrote:

Well I've brought up repeatedly the absurdity of holding men fiscally responsible for a choice they have no say in.

That is the opposite of what I was trying to say in a way. Hey, if it is a "mistake" and one party, the one not carrying the "mistake" wants out. They should pay. After all, she didn't blow him, practice yoga and then impregnate herself. Sorry for the graphics, but man, a man has to be responsible too.

SundaySilence

surferdude wrote:

Well I've brought up repeatedly the absurdity of holding men fiscally responsible for a choice they have no say in.

Nothing absurd. Quite simple really. A couple has a child they are both responsible. The decision to get there is no more your concern that it is a matter of public policy. Are you absurdly suggesting men be legislated veto power over their partners use of this method?

surferdude

even flow? wrote:

That is the opposite of what I was trying to say in a way. Hey, if it is a "mistake" and one party, the one not carrying the "mistake" wants out. They should pay. After all, she didn't blow him, practice yoga and then impregnate herself. Sorry for the graphics, but man, a man has to be responsible too.

He wore a condom, he was responsible. Now what? If we are going to hold him fiscally responsible then he should be given the same type of choices given a woman in the name of equality. obviously he can't have the same choices but it woul dbe very easy to give a man the choice to walk away with no parental rights or obligations including financial responsibilities within the first trimester of preganancy, or even within the first three days of sex. Currently the is no equality or semblence of fairness or balance in the current legislation. It is up to the woman to decide to carry on with a possible preganacy, then up to the woman to decide to carry on with a pregnancy, then up to a woman to decide to name the father on the birth certificate. But a man has to prove he's not the father (no presumption of innocence here) to not pay child support, but a mother does not need to prove paternity to apply to the courts for child support. A man also is not given any automatic parental rights by being a father, where as a woman is given full parental rights just for being female. The system is so far out of kiliter it is ridiculous.

VictoryGin

RainDog wrote:

Thanks for the information. Say the brand is Ortho Tri-Cyclin, she keeps an extra pack on hand for just such an occassion, and takes three of them --- Um, not that I'm, uh, speaking from experience or anything - but if I was, it would have happened long before this Plan B was cleared. Not that anything happened, mind you.

I agree that this Plan B contraceptive is the best way to go in emergency situations. It's definitely a victory, as you say. But - not that I'm speaking from experience, mind you - I'd say its a victory for everyone; not just the ladies.

Please tell your hypothetical friend that OrthoTriCyc doesn't really cut it. Whew, thank goodness everything worked out though. On a sidenote, I'm curious why your hypothetical friend uses OrthoTri instead of OrthoCyclen (almost the same thing, but monophasic). Triphasic does work better for some, but if your friend hasn't tried OrthoCyclen and is ever interested in skipping periods, well that's an option.

Okay, sorry. *Just in case* any friends need this infor, here are the pills you can use as EC in place of something like Plan B:


Progestin-only Pills
Plan B® Barr 1 white pill 1 white pill
or 2 white pills in one dose
Ovrette® Wyeth-Ayerst 20 yellow pills 20 yellow pills
or 40 yellow pills in one dose

Combination Hormone Pills

Alesse® Wyeth-Ayerst 5 pink pills 5 pink pills
Aviane® Duramed 5 orange pills 5 orange pills
Cryselle® Barr 4 white pills 4 white pills
Enpresse® Barr 4 orange pills 4 orange pills
Lessina® Barr 5 pink pills 5 pink pills
Levlen® Berlex 4 light orange pills 4 light orange pills
Levlite® Berlex 5 pink pills 5 pink pills
Levora® Watson 4 white pills 4 white pills
Lo/Ovral® Wyeth-Ayerst 4 white pills 4 white pills
LowOgestrel® Watson 4 white pills 4 white pills
LuteraTM Watson 5 white pills 5 white pills
Nordette® Wyeth-Ayerst 4 light orange pills 4 light orange pills
Ogestrel® Watson 2 white pills 2 white pills
Ovral® Wyeth-Ayerst 2 white pills 2 white pills
Portia® Barr 4 pink pills 4 pink pills

Seasonale® Barr 4 pink pills 4 pink pills

SeasoniqueTM Barr 4 blue-green pills 4 blue-green pills

Tri-Levlen® Berlex 4 yellow pills 4 yellow pills
Triphasil® Wyeth-Ayerst 4 yellow pills 4 yellow pills
Trivora® Watson 4 pink pills 4 pink pills

With a regular 28-pill birth control pack, use any of the first 21 pills for emergency contraception. Don't use the last seven pills in a 28-day pack. They are only reminder pills that contain no hormones. With Enpresse, use only the orange ones. With Triphasil or Tri-Levlen, use only the yellow ones. With Trivora, use only the pink ones.


http://www.plannedparenthood.org/pp2/portal/files/portal/medicalinfo/ec/pub-emergency-contraception.xml#1156433187012::2158196329463216465

I'm sorry about implying this was only a victory for ladies. It is a victory for dudes too (I mean, one other contraceptive device they don't need to be responsible for ). Seriously though, yay!

surferdude

SundaySilence wrote:

Nothing absurd. Quite simple really. A couple has a child they are both responsible. The decision to get there is no more your concern that it is a matter of public policy. Are you absurdly suggesting men be legislated veto power over their partners use of this method?

Not at all. Give men a legal method to walk away from a pregnancy with no future obligations or consequences. A right that every woman has.

even flow?

surferdude wrote:

He wore a condom, he was responsible. Now what? If we are going to hold him fiscally responsible then he should be given the same type of choices given a woman in the name of equality. obviously he can't have the same choices but it woul dbe very easy to give a man the choice to walk away with no parental rights or obligations including financial responsibilities within the first trimester of preganancy, or even within the first three days of sex. Currently the is no equality or semblence of fairness or balance in the current legislation. It is up to the woman to decide to carry on with a possible preganacy, then up to the woman to decide to carry on with a pregnancy, then up to a woman to decide to name the father on the birth certificate. But a man has to prove he's not the father (no presumption of innocence here) to not pay child support, but a mother does not need to prove paternity to apply to the courts for child support. A man also is not given any automatic parental rights by being a father, where as a woman is given full parental rights just for being female. The system is so far out of kiliter it is ridiculous.

Then he should stick to porno mags where nobody can get pregnant. I am not one to boast about any kind of church but at least they try with planned parenting. As in if you are going to knock boots, you "both" may have a responsibility on your hands for the rest of your mortal lives.

So if some chick told you to have a vasectomy before having sex so she could ensure not getting pregnant that might just fly, eh. Same as you having the choice after filling her with sperm that you may want her to get an abortion. See the problem starts when you insert your penis into the vagina and both of you are idiots. Plain and simple.

cornnifer

hippiemom wrote:

Sorry, but that's how it comes across. There's no debate about how you feel personally and what you do in your own life ... obviously, if you and your partner don't like this pill for whatever reason, you won't use it. The debate is about public policy, for or against this being available over the counter. And it certainly does come across as moralizing when you go on and on about the irresponsibility of using birth control after, rather than prior to, sex. And for someone who admits to making many mistakes (as we all have), it seems a bit harsh to say pregnancy and a lifetime of unwanted parenthood is what someone deserves for making what is, in your view, a poor decision.

It just astounds me that anyone could be opposed to a safe, effective method of birth control that will prevent abortions, not to mention providing peace of mind to millions of women. I was never promiscous, but I can think of a few times when this pill would have taken a load off my mind, to say the least. And if I had been promiscous, so what? It's no one's business but my own.

i get the impression that anyone who disagrees with you would come across as, and be accused of, moralizing. Sorry, but thats how it comes across. Technically, i could accuse you of the same thing. i won't. First of all, i don't believe it. Secondly, for someone as disliked as i am around here to accuse someone of your high esteem of ANYTHING would be asking for trouble.

i've never said anyone deserves an unwanted pregnancy. i've only said that people should be responsible, and that this pill is, IMO, a copout on responsibility. i stand by that assessment. i also never suggested it shouldn't be available either OTC or otherwise. Personally, i don't really care.

take care

Milhouse VanHouten

cornnifer wrote:

i've never said anyone deserves an unwanted pregnancy. i've only said that people should be responsible, and that this pill is, IMO, a copout on responsibility. i stand by that assessment. i also never suggested it shouldn't be available either OTC or otherwise. Personally, i don't really care.

take care

How is Plan B a copout? What responsibility does the person have that is being "copped out" on?

Am I "copping out" on my moral obligation to suffer if I take a couple of Tylenol to relieve a headache after I drank too much the night before?

VictoryGin

even flow? wrote:

Same as you having the choice after filling her with sperm that you may want her to get an abortion. See the problem starts when you insert your penis into the vagina and both of you are idiots. Plain and simple.

As soon as I read this, I thought of that part in Singles when Steve's mom took him to the doctor to learn about sex. It was something like this:
doctor: the father inserts his penis into the mother's vagina, and what comes out is sperm [Steve nods while sitting next to mom]

later at the playground, little Steve tells his friends: then the man keeps moving until something squirts out of his penis!
kid 1: What?
kid 2: Yeah, what comes out?

Steve: Spam!

cornnifer

Milhouse VanHouten wrote:

How is Plan B a copout? What responsibility does the person have that is being "copped out" on?

Am I "copping out" on my moral obligation to suffer if I take a couple of Tylenol to relieve a headache after I drank too much the night before?

i've already addressed these things, and, have been put in my place and accused of moralizing. Pardon me if i politely decline response.

surferdude

even flow? wrote:

Then he should stick to porno mags where nobody can get pregnant. I am not one to boast about any kind of church but at least they try with planned parenting. As in if you are going to knock boots, you "both" may have a responsibility on your hands for the rest of your mortal lives.

So if some chick told you to have a vasectomy before having sex so she could ensure not getting pregnant that might just fly, eh. Same as you having the choice after filling her with sperm that you may want her to get an abortion. See the problem starts when you insert your penis into the vagina and both of you are idiots. Plain and simple.

This is ludicous, when this is a thread that is celebrating additional choice. Yet here you are saying the one and only choice a man should have is to have sex or not. Pro choice, my ass.

Milhouse VanHouten

VictoryGin wrote:

As soon as I read this, I thought of that part in Singles when Steve's mom took him to the doctor to learn about sex. It was something like this:
doctor: the father inserts his penis into the mother's vagina, and what comes out is sperm [Steve nods while sitting next to mom]

later at the playground, little Steve tells his friends: then the man keeps moving until something squirts out of his penis!
kid 1: What?
kid 2: Yeah, what comes out?

Steve: Spam!

I also liked that Steve drew inspiration in the bedroom from former Seattle Sonics legend Xavier McDaniels: "Don't cum yet, Steve!"

Collin

Do you think people only should have sex if they can support a child in case of an accident? Like when the condom breaks?

hippiemom

cornnifer wrote:

i get the impression that anyone who disagrees with you would come across as, and be accused of, moralizing. Sorry, but thats how it comes across. Technically, i could accuse you of the same thing. i won't. First of all, i don't believe it. Secondly, for someone as disliked as i am around here to accuse someone of your high esteem of ANYTHING would be asking for trouble.

i've never said anyone deserves an unwanted pregnancy. i've only said that people should be responsible, and that this pill is, IMO, a copout on responsibility. i stand by that assessment. i also never suggested it shouldn't be available either OTC or otherwise. Personally, i don't really care.

take care

In that case, we've been arguing over nothing. I'm not interested in changing anyone's opinion on these pills themselves, only on whether or not they should be freely available. If you don't care one way or another, then we have no disagreement.

Personally, I'm not wild about sex outside of committed relationships. I think that people should take their sexuality seriously, treat themselves and their partners with the utmost respect, and take every possible precaution to avoid bringing an unwanted life into the world. I think planning ahead is a good idea. I also recognize that not everyone views sex the same way I do, and that's fine. If someone else wants to go at it like a cat in heat, who am I to say they shouldn't?

And of course, people do stupid things every day. If we can safely eliminate some of the more disastrous consequences of those stupid things, I'm all for it. They're going to do them anyway, regardless of what you or I might think, so if we can have fewer unwanted kids and fewer abortions, that's a good thing in my book.

humanlight

surferdude wrote:

He wore a condom, he was responsible. Now what? If we are going to hold him fiscally responsible then he should be given the same type of choices given a woman in the name of equality. obviously he can't have the same choices but it woul dbe very easy to give a man the choice to walk away with no parental rights or obligations including financial responsibilities within the first trimester of preganancy, or even within the first three days of sex. Currently the is no equality or semblence of fairness or balance in the current legislation. It is up to the woman to decide to carry on with a possible preganacy, then up to the woman to decide to carry on with a pregnancy, then up to a woman to decide to name the father on the birth certificate. But a man has to prove he's not the father (no presumption of innocence here) to not pay child support, but a mother does not need to prove paternity to apply to the courts for child support. A man also is not given any automatic parental rights by being a father, where as a woman is given full parental rights just for being female. The system is so far out of kiliter it is ridiculous.

I agree the legal system sucks. I have seen many a man screwed b/c of the court system. My brother -in- law for one. He and his ex were never married, but she got pregnant. Now she has the baby 5 days more a month than he does. this means she has primary custody. this means he must pay child support to her. In the amount of $500! Are you kidding me. she is making $100 a day on those 5 days. Outrageous.

I think the men also need choices, but I honestly cannot think of how that could be done. It seems to me that you preach and preach that you men need to have choices, but you don't have any ideas either. Im not trying to be mean, just an observation.

Collin

hippiemom wrote:

In that case, we've been arguing over nothing. I'm not interested in changing anyone's opinion on these pills themselves, only on whether or not they should be freely available. If you don't care one way or another, then we have no disagreement.

Personally, I'm not wild about sex outside of committed relationships. I think that people should take their sexuality seriously, treat themselves and their partners with the utmost respect, and take every possible precaution to avoid bringing an unwanted life into the world. I think planning ahead is a good idea. I also recognize that not everyone views sex the same way I do, and that's fine. If someone else wants to go at it like a cat in heat, who am I to say they shouldn't?

And of course, people do stupid things every day. If we can safely eliminate some of the more disastrous consequences of those stupid things, I'm all for it. They're going to do them anyway, regardless of what you or I might think, so if we can have fewer unwanted kids and fewer abortions, that's a good thing in my book.

I agree with you (most of it)