Categories
antifeminism I'm totally being sarcastic ladies against women reactionary bullshit sex

Contraceptives make us all passive-aggressive arguers, says passive-aggressive arguer

Not the original caption, alas. Borrowed from The Mangina Monologues. (Click the pic to see the original post.)

Apparently, using contraceptives turns couples into The Lockhorns. Or so this post from CL on Complementarian Loners suggests:

Contraception reduces sex to recreation – ‘fun’ without the deep joy that a mindfully lived life can bring – and thus this percolates through the relationship as a whole. All those little jabs at each other, the passive-aggressive ways of letting the other know that you are hurting, and the hiding are part of this mentality. We’ve all done it, just as most of us have contracepted.

I’m sure many people will think this a stretch, but when we withhold something as central as our fertility from each other, what else do we withhold? Self-censored thought is like contraceptive sex. Married couples are often reluctant to be completely honest with each other and are apt to become defensive with each other, ending up – or even starting out – as adversaries rather than team mates. Since the so-called sexual revolution (think about that term for a moment), women and men have not needed each other the way they used to. Separating sexual intercourse from procreation has also separated us from each other – and from our essential selves – in a real way.

Yeah, it’s probably better for married couples to eschew contraception entirely and have eight gazillion children. And then get a reality show.

 

287 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Podkayne
12 years ago

@Shakakhan We only want to entrap the alpha assholes. Poor betas or zetas or whatever like CL we FORCE to wear condoms, and this make him sad. What we’re really denying him is the same VIP treatment we give alpha assholes, and he’s caught on to this important fact.

Dani Alexis
Dani Alexis
12 years ago

I actually feel a little sorry for CL. Zie must have had an awful lot of passive-aggressive relationships if zie thinks that’s “normal.”

…But then, CL would be the only common denominator in a string of CL’s passive-aggressive relationships. So I’m not as sorry as “srsly?”

Tulgey Logger
Tulgey Logger
12 years ago

Futrelle posts something I agree with 100%. I am disappoint.

Hey Dipshitzu, you might find this video on a similar topic interesting.

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

CL (cretinous loser?), do you really think depriving couples of contraception really makes them more open, loving, trusting, joyful or whatever? You’re removing choice and protection from people who may not want children at all, or simply not now. Not everyone wants to breed. Not everyone can safely do so. Nobody should be deprived of the choice, especially those who have to live with the risks, discomforts and serious medical consequences of pregnancy.

You know what would happen if I was in danger of pregnancy? There’d be a lot LESS sex, and what there was would be a lot less joyful, because I would always have that fear in my mind. That’s not the way to promote closeness, relaxation and trust. That’s just a misogynistic power trip you’re on, making women more vulnerable again. Get off on that idea, do you?

You’re also effectively saying that those who are infertile – through choice or not – somehow can’t really make love or have a joyful marriage. Nice bit of judgementalism there.

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

Argh. “Really” twice in one sentence.

::blushes::

scarlettpipistrelle
12 years ago

Heads up: The wit and wisdom of Cooterbee, flowing forth at http://www.the-spearhead.com/2012/10/30/divorce-and-separation-harm-reduction/

cooterbee October 31, 2012 at 06:40

The 90 day rule proposed rests on at least two flawed assumptions:

murder/suicide is a bad thing and

that anyone (in this case the courts) can interfere with a man’s private affairs for any reason.

Before I proceed with my points, I acknowledge of such the intent of such a rule is to reduce human suffering. Laudable but ineffectual. Trading murder/suicide for a two-step process to drive a man to suicide only helps the woman. Also, imposing such a rule implies that some men should follow it because it is a rule. Nobody — no cop, no judge, no president — should be afforded any legitimacy in interfering with a man’s family affairs. Conceding that to any degree is tantamount to self-imposed slavery.

At this point, loving fathers and devoted husbands are suited up and in the starting lineup of Team Vagina. In essence, a murder/suicide is a BOGO for our side. Why would we want to stop it? Assuming that married men are fully men (I don’t believe it but that’s another thread) how does it benefit us, in a war of attrition, to save the enemy but still destroy then man but this time, in two increments?

ozymandias42
12 years ago

The flawed assumption that murder-suicide is a bad thing.

…Nice social justice movement you guys have got there.

ozymandias42
12 years ago

Oh, god, CL’s relationship tag is full of gems.

“The two cannot become one in completeness with ‘personal boundaries’. When boundaries are created between two people, the two remain two. This philosophically gets in the way of the two becoming one flesh, much as a condom is a physical boundary results in mutual masturbation. Strict personal boundaries is actually a ludicrous idea and fundamentally evil, since it undermines what should be a great and transcendental Christian vocation.”

http://curmudgeonloner.wordpress.com/category/relationships-2/page/3/

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

Wow. That’s just … I mean, it’s not surprising as such, given how obvious they are about thinking they’ve the right to commit murder*, but actually saying it so baldly.

*Do they think killing women and children is actually murder, since they don’t see anyone as white straight men as human?

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

Ozy – don’t you get the feeling CL has trouble with the idea of a person’s worth as an individual, just generally? Or even just being interested in person X, or loving them, because of who they are? I’m not phrasing this too well but to me the whole loss of individuality thing he’s blabbing about suggests he’s only interested in someone as an extension of himself. It’s wrapped up in fauxChristian nonsense but it sounds like that just plays into a huge ego trip.

ozymandias42
12 years ago

Kitteh: CL is female, I believe.

I… really am trying to imagine a relationship without personal boundaries and it’s scaring me. My boundaries are good! I need my alone time, not to be touched when I don’t want to be touched, not to be forced to be around alcohol or drugs… A relationship where I couldn’t have those things is one where I wouldn’t be happy.

Pear_tree
Pear_tree
12 years ago

Am I being very controversial in thinking that when it comes to custody the child (if old enough) should be asked what the prefer? (Sorry for being a sock puppet under slightly different versions of my name, I can never remember the exact capitalization each time I have to enter it again).

ozymandias42
12 years ago

“I attract a lot of, uh, dislike from women.”

GEE I HAVE NO IDEA WHY.

“A woman should care more about pleasing her man and his opinion of her than she should for what other women think of her. Women always twist the truth about other people. A woman’s approval is not genuine and therefore is meaningless. A man’s approval is satisfying if the woman is honest and shows him who she really is.”

http://curmudgeonloner.wordpress.com/2012/09/17/the-herd-and-the-loner/

blucheez
blucheez
12 years ago

What i find sad is that CL thinks that sex is ever just 2 things: procreation or recreation. The power of the bond that develops from physical intimacy and love can far exceed the utulitarian functions CL limits his mind to.

clairedammit
clairedammit
12 years ago

Scarlettpipistrelle, that’s horrifying. It only makes sense if these guys can only see women and children as possessions.

princessbonbon
12 years ago

Nobody — no cop, no judge, no president — should be afforded any legitimacy in interfering with a man’s family affairs.

Too bad, so sad, the hell that you get to do whatever the fuck you want with your family.

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

Ozy, yup, my mistake – she does mention being the mother of two children. And CL seems to stand for curmudgeon loner, which says a great deal, too. So it’s internalised misogyny in her case, I’m guessing, and perhaps not valuing herself as an individual at all, since she has such a low opinion of women.

Yeah, boundaries. I’ve had one relationship, not what most would think of as such, and it’s joyous and wonderful, very close – but he’s still him and I’m still me, individual people.That’s one of the things that’s so good about it: a different person, a whole other world. We’re together forever and we add to each other, but that’s not losing our individuality, it’s complementing it.

clairedammit
clairedammit
12 years ago

Pear_tree, when I was a kid (late ’70’s in Florida) kids could choose which parent they lived with if they were at least 12. It wasn’t easy – I moved from my mom’s to my dad’s and my mom fought it and we had to go go court – but there was never any doubt that I’d be able to move.

Nobody — no cop, no judge, no president — should be afforded any legitimacy in interfering with a man’s family affairs.

Yeah, and the rest of the family doesn’t have a say either! /sarcasm

cloudiah
12 years ago

Given what I think of the Spearhead, at this point I’m just glad Cooterbee’s not getting any upvotes. Sigh.

I love how Price’s idea is that you can prevent “frivolous” divorces by having women* forced into 3 months of destitution for themselves and their children by delaying “any financial obligations” for that period of time. Gee, wouldn’t you think that men who, you know, LOVED their kids wouldn’t want them to go without things like food & shelter for 3 months just to punish their mothers?

*I know it’s not always women receiving money and men paying money after divorce, but I also know how they think over there.

The Kittehs' Unpaid Help

Gee, wouldn’t you think that men who, you know, LOVED their kids wouldn’t want them to go without things like food & shelter for 3 months just to punish their mothers?

Which goes back to my pet theory* about MRMs – they are incapable of love, or at least, can’t separate it from the idea of possession.

*I wish I could say that meant a theory thought up by a pet, but Mads is keeping her thoughts to herself on this one.

Minsc (and Boo!)
12 years ago

murder/suicide is a bad thing …

Trading murder/suicide for a two-step process to drive a man to suicide only helps the woman. …

At this point, loving fathers and devoted husbands are suited up and in the starting lineup of Team Vagina. In essence, a murder/suicide is a BOGO for our side. Why would we want to stop it? Assuming that married men are fully men (I don’t believe it but that’s another thread) how does it benefit us, in a war of attrition, to save the enemy but still destroy then man but this time, in two increments?

Ha ha, trick or treat, my what a scary costume you’ve got there!

Strict personal boundaries is actually a ludicrous idea and fundamentally evil, since it undermines what should be a great and transcendental Christian vocation.

Ha ha ha! Well, it’s midnight, time to take off our costumes!

Go on! Take that mask off!

Wait, you’re serious?!

*doesn’t make any sudden moves, backs away slowly*

Shiraz
Shiraz
12 years ago

I think it’s hot when a guy is completely willing to withhold his fertility from me. He gets extra points if he’s had a vasectomy.

And I dunno, I guess if someone doesn’t like sex because they haven’t given themselves permission to like sex for its own sake, they’ll convince themselves it’s all about the babeez. Latex and the pill prevent intimacy? That’s too stupid.
But maybe I should be kinder when referencing someone who obviously doesn’t know they’ve been brainwashed.

Zanana
Zanana
12 years ago

I totally thought CL and 7man were married to each other and then I read this: http://curmudgeonloner.wordpress.com/common-criticisms/

Are they dating each other? Or are they platonic friends who just get together to gang up on other people in passive aggressive arguments?

scarlettpipistrelle
12 years ago

I archived the page, just in case the quote is ever needed and it vanishes. Price has never learned. Lie down with dogs, get up with fleas, etc.

Minsc (and Boo!)
12 years ago

In re: children choosing where they live, here in Tennessee, a child can start expressing a preference to the judge in chambers when the child is 12 or so, and as the child ages, the judge is supposed to give more weight to the child’s opinion, but the judge still gets to make a ruling and is supposed to consider the best interests of the child.

That’s how I understand it. I am a legal assistant with no formal legal training.