Recent high profile comments on sexual health, specifically abortion and birth control, have led to more discussion of this hotly debated topic. The comments I am referring to are Representative Todd Akin’s statements about legitimate rape and Senate candidate Richard Mourdock’s remarks on God’s intentions following a rape. Akin goes on to say that there should be repercussions of legitimate rape and that the “punishment ought to be on the rapist and not attacking the child”. Both comments broadly neglect the role of the woman in this horrific circumstance. These comments can most certainly be considered insensitive and rude, but also detail the vast range of beliefs on the topic.

As a person of a scientific background, I believe the base of the discussion comes back to the determination of when life begins. The fusion of the sperm and egg does in fact represent the start of a new life form but with some considerations. This life form cannot survive on its own and is still completely dependent on the mother for the entire pregnancy. Therefore, in my singular opinion, the functional definition of the beginning of a new life should be limited to the birth of the child. Before this point, I think considerations on the mother’s part about whether to support or abort life are the most important factors.

As the authors of Speaking of Sexuality highlight in their coverage of sexual communication and the effects alcohol has on the matter, a person’s beliefs on contraception and abortion are often tied to many other factors. Societal factors such as gender roles, sexuality, religion, family upbringing, and education all contribute to a person’s belief on sexual health.

Within an American society founded upon freedom and embracing the benefits of diversity, I believe individual beliefs about reproduction cannot be forced onto others. Ultimately it must be the decision of the individual or couple about what methods they deem morally acceptable and realistically responsible. For this to occur, contraceptive methods and abortive procedures must be within reach in certain circumstances. Educational measures must also be taken to inform people about such services so that they may be able to make a rational, justified decision.

I think that as we witness the current and likely future rejection of past gender roles within the heterosexual so too will we see a change in the outlook on reproductive health. In order to give women the same degree of sexual freedom that men traditionally have, they will need the health related mechanisms to be able to control the results. With considerations such a career and family planning, the benefits of controlling the large commitment of pregnancy are important. Ultimately the decision should come down to the individual rather than a set base of rules.

Over the years, we’ve seen fluctuating rates of sexually transmitted infections [1]. Although it is not accurate, I picture a trend similar to a bell curve to understand the rates. We initially saw a static number in the amount of cases surrounding the discovery of a disease, an exponential increase in the subsequent years, and then a decrease as people became aware and educated on the disease. This isn’t true for all the infections, but holds true for many.

So with the increase in education, why do young people account for half the STIs when they are only 25% of the population [2]? Emory had a required class that taught students about condom use, I assume that other colleges implement these same classes. The education is being drilled in everywhere we go, but apparently that is not enough.

I believed condoms and a little information would be enough. Apparently there are more components than that. Social and cultural factors seem to be the more prominent reason for contraceptive disuse rather than ignorance and unavailability [3].

Among young adults (15-24), use of contraceptives such as condoms are linked to lack of trust. The use of condoms is looked upon as an insult because it suggests infidelity within the relationship. In a monogamous relationship, condoms are thought to be unnecessary because the spread of diseases should be nonexistent. [4]

Another issue is the stigma associated with condoms. Carrying them around assumes sex. This may not be a big deal for guys, but the unfortunate double standard looks upon girls negatively for carrying them around. Reputation is a huge factor because people will believe you are carrying a disease, which means they assume you have a long sexual history.

It seems like culture has an impact too. In countries where males are typically dominant in the community, the women don’t have a say on contraceptive use. In South Africa for instance, men decide the use of condoms. Men receive more pleasure without condom use so it seems like that dictates the use.

It was eye opening to see that STIs are passed on because of reasons other than ignorance or availability. I thought those were the only two reasons, but stigma is a huge factor that I never considered. One of the primary sources that I used discussed most of the data based off Africa, so I think factors like disempowerment or violence would not be as big a determining factor in the US. I think factors like trust or rejection would be bigger determinants in the US.

[1] http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats10/figures/14.htm

[2] http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats10/adol.htm

[3] http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15545100/ns/health-sexual_health/t/why-young-people-dont-use-condoms/#.UI23jruwQcs

[4] http://www.phcfm.org/index.php/phcfm/article/view/79/101

According to Merriam Webster, abortion is “the termination of a pregnancy after, accompanied by, resulting in, or closely followed by the death of the embryo or fetus”. There have been countless disputes over the moral dilemmas of abortion. But where the issue arises is the question when exactly does life starts? This answer varies amongst individuals and religion. Does life start immediately at conception or later after the embryo is formed?

This issue has even come up in the current presidential election. Obama believes that it is a personal choice that should be made without interference from politicians, whereas Romney opposes abortion with the exception for rape, incest and danger to the life of the mother. The Indiana Republic Senate candidate Richard Mourdock said that abortion should be illegal even in the cases of rape. He said he “think[s] that even when life begins in that horrible situation of rape, that it is something that God intended to happen” [3]. These varied opinions in politics are such a taste of the many different opinions in the world. Some people, who are against abortion, label pro-abortion individuals as “baby killers” [1]. Some people label women who get abortions as selfish. Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinions, but making laws on this becomes extremely difficult.

In France, they have a different outlook than America. They are passing a law to “fully reimburse all abortions and to make contraception free for minors” [2]. Making all abortions free give and women the right to decide whether or not they want to stop their pregnancy. France also allows minors to have abortions without parental consent, which I believe is a little too lenient. France was also one of the first countries to have the drug RU-486, which causes the embryo itself to detach from the uterine wall [2]. This is different than the morning after pill in the United States, which prevents fertilization from even occurring, preventing pregnancy itself. The pill that is in Europe, is much more similar in abortion. People in France seem to be a lot more open and accepting of abortion and it’s pretty surprising as to how open they are about it. Some may even say it comes to the point where they are promoting abortion because they are offering it free of charge.

On the other hand, back in America, people still have many debates on abortion. Some of the talk has been regarding the timing of abortion and what time exactly makes it ok. Of course having an abortion in the first trimester is better than having one later one. And public support for the first trimester abortion is actually the most (60-70%). There is also a large majority that supports abortion when the women’s life is endangered by pregnancy, or if it was caused from rape or incest, or when the fetus is found to be “defective” [1].

People in America will always have differing views about abortion and it is kind of unavoidable. I feel the government should not get too involved and force decisions amongst people and just let people decide on their own what they want to do. Of course, there will always be protests for people who are very much anti-abortion, but people do have the right to voice their opinions to the public.

[1] From Contraception to Abortion: A Moral Continuum by Wendy Simonds

[2] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/26/france-free-abortion-bill_n_2023729.html

[3] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/28/ron-johnson-mitt-romney-abortion_n_2032145.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2012

[4] http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2012/10/28/presidential-stances-on-abortion/

I’d like to preface this blog entry by saying that I am currently in an 2-3 day trek back from New York where the soccer team’s flight back to Atlanta was cancelled due to Hurricane Sandy wreaking havoc all up the east coast. I’m not trying to gain sympathy points, merely stating that the wifi access I have is very limited and painfully slow so my entry may not retain some of the reading information (and also I may not be able to make class on Tuesday morning).

They say that communication is key in a relationship. I’d like to further that and say that communication is key in a sexual relationship. Most people seem to shy away from conversations of sex especially when talking to people of opposite gender. In society, the topic of sex seems to be taboo until it comes to a political or celebrity scandal. Otherwise, sex is personal and hush hush. We’re not talking about it as kids until our parents give us the “birds and bees” talk and don’t tell me that wasn’t one of the worst conversations you’ve had with your parents. So why would we talk about it in high school, college, and in our adult lives? It’s so essential to a healthy sexual experience.

“…research suggests that women are often lacking in the training and socialization necessary to be effective communicators in sexual relationships” (Moore 172). The only way to learn is to be taught and experience it. The only way to really gain an experience is to become intimate with someone for a long period of time until the comfort level sets in. Once the comfort is there, usually the communication will follow. But what if someone never had the comfort of being in a sexual relationship early on in life? College hits, and the random hookups begin. Not a lot of freshman are going to have the confidence to openly communicate with a random hook up partner. If there’s a lack of confidence, you risk a bad sexual experience. Are you using birth control? Do you have a condom? Are you comfortable with this? These and more questions have to be communicated.

Confidence comes with experience. Experience comes with intimacy. In college, many people don’t get the gift of intimacy. Usually it’s quick, one or two night stand, and then get out. Sorry, but those frat beds are not big enough for two people. It comes down to cuddling and awkward morning chats or enjoying the comforts of your own bed… which do you prefer? There may not be a good chance for communication, especially after a sexual encounter; however, it has to happen. Otherwise, there’s a good chance that some poor girl will be walking to CVS to pick up that plan B the next morning. “College women are more likely to experience feelings of anxiety, nervousness, embarassment, and guilt during their first sexual intercourse rather than excitement and pleasure…” (Moore 172). Nervous and embarassed college girls don’t sound like the type that are about to ask if their sexual partner has a STI.

Along with prevention of sexually transmitted diseases/infections, communication helps partners discover pleasure and fun during sexual intercourse. Saying what you like, where, and asking questions can only help one’s self and partners pleasure. It may be uncomfortable at first, but it may be completely worth it. You know your body better than anyone else, so telling a partner what you like will help achieve a heightened sense of pleasure.

Communication will help prevent disease, pregnancy, and dissatisfaction.

Moore, Nelwyn, and Kenneth Davidson. Communicating with New Sex Partners. Print.

After reading a CDC article and comparing it to my research in the archives this past week, I am a bit astonished with Emory.  Back in 1994, The Emory Wheel wrote an article entitled the “A, B, C’s of STD’s: be smart, safe, protected.” [1]In this article, the author Christina Bell informs readers that safe sex is the only way to protect against STIs (big shock there). In the CDC’s research filed under STS in Adolescents to Young Adults, they report that “the ages 15-24 represent only 25% of the sexually expierenced population, [yet] they acquire nearly half of all new STDs.” [2] Within this same study the CDC postulates that there are a number of factors that lead to this including: behavioral, biological cultural reason AND the barriers to accessing STD prevention services. [2]

Going back to the Emory Wheel article, Bell notes several services such as Student Health Services, but what difference exists now from 1994? Condom vending machines! I find it shocking that this practice has not continued on the grounds of an institution for higher education. Admittedly, I can see the issue that Emory could potentially have on Parent’s weekend when the “folks” see these types of vending machines as they go to get a Coke in the Psychology building. But let us be realistic; this is college. Sex happens whether parents like it not, therefore it is a reality that must be taken into consideration. Would a parent not feel more comfortable about the University offering a method that would protect their “little baby?” Yes, parents can be naive and assume that would never be their child, but the University cannot be. The idea of strategically placing a condom vending machine throughout various parts of the campus is ingenious (it’s another way Emory can find a way to get more money out of the students—right along with the ridiculous parking office). Reverting back to the point, we have seen through the various articles we have read this past week that alcohol plays a serious role along with one’s personality toward having risky sex [3].

Again, here is another shocking fact; college students drink. Recapping just to make sure we have this clear, college students have sex and they do drink on occasion, now consider where is Student Health Services in relation to where students spend their time? It’s roughly a 20 minute walk to go ask for some free condoms, and roughly the same to walk to CVS. Breaking this down now, the free condoms that Student Health Services gives away certainly are not good quality. In fact, they are the ones that epitomize why condoms are hated during sex, not to mention they make the guy look like he has a Jolly Rancher (not referencing D4L’s song “Laffy Taffy”). Therefore, the options laid out right now consist of a relatively short walk, but who really has time in the midst of classes and other campus events to walk to either of these places, more realistically who WANTS to make that walk?

So after all this, let’s play out a little scenario. A guy and girl just left a party on either Frat Row, or otherwise, and let’s say the guy has forgotten he ran out of condoms. What happens? One of two things they continue and end up having unsafe sex, or the night does not end quite as it should have. But wait, what if there were condom vending machines conveniently and strategically located? Well let’s leave it at, there could be a happy ending for all parties involved.

1)

A,B,Cs of STDs (1/2)

A,B,Cs of STDs (2/2)

2) http://www.cdc.gov/std/stats10/adol.htm

3) https://classes.emory.edu/bbcswebdav/pid-1642086-dt-content-rid-262267_2/courses/FA12_AMST_385_DTROKA_Combined/condom%20use%20with%20a%20casual%20partner.pdf

Contraception is perhaps one of those things that just will never be fully accepted nor refuted. It is something that seems to always attract controversy no matter the arena in which it is introduced. In addition, abortion is even more inflammatory, creating teams that slander one another in the hopes of attracting the most supporters. The “Pro-Life” and “Pro-Choice” teams often create suggestive language implying the inferiority of the opposing team. Wendy Simonds in “From Contraception to Abortion: A Moral Continuum” summarized this in the statement “Anti-abortionists call themselves ‘pro-life,’ and refer to their enemies as ‘pro abortion,’ whereas those who support abortion rights counter with ‘pro-choice’ and refer to their opponents as ‘anti-choice,’ or more simply, as ‘antis’.” This type of suggestive language not only creates tension within society and awkwardness when discussing the subject matter, but it also places a particular pressure on women.

In a previous blog, I referred to the killings that took place at the Pensacola Abortion Clinic. John Bayard Britton was a 70 year-old doctor murdered in cold blood by “Pro-life” advocates.  The reason for his murder was the simple fact that he practiced abortion procedures. He was the replacement of the first victim, Dr. Dunn, and Britton practiced these procedures after witnessing the poverty and health problems that often lead to women needing abortions. Often times, the need for an abortion is not the direct result of the woman’s voluntary actions. Yet with there being murders of doctors practicing abortions and “Pro-Life” advocates derogatorily considering abortion right supporters “Pro-Abortion,” where is the choice in that?

A 1989 entry in the Emory Wheel introduced a new paradigm of this issue; religion. Sex is something that, these days, is hard to avoid. It is in the media, it is among our friends, and, as seen by this course, it is even in our schools. Therefore, as Lyle Anderson Caldwell put it, the “S” word is not something that we should be squeamish to say or discuss. Additionally, this article spoke about the religious obligations that forbade abortion and even offered medical financial assistance, yet should something have gone wrong, like a miscarriage, the woman was left alone in the aftermath of pro-life hypnotism.

As Caldwell put it, “there is no easy solution to the issue of abortion that is dividing our country.” This was true in 1989 and remains true today. The fact of the matter is, this is something that needs to be left to the mercy of perception and individual opinion. Killing in the name of life and religion in the name or persuasion are two roads that will exacerbate the current mayhem.  Not to say that either side is right or wrong because I will leave my pro-choice opinion out of it, yet it is not and never will be fair to force somebody else to do something in the name of your personal beliefs.

Note Oct 25, 2012

The Emory Lesbian and Gay Organization took part in the historic march on Washington for lesbian and gay rights in 1987. In this time period, there was a large uproar in the lesbian and gay community over the Bowers v. Hardwick court case of 1986. In this case, the Georgia sodomy law was ruled by the Supreme Court 5-4 that anal and oral sex between homosexuals was a criminal act. When the lesbian and gay community heard of this, they came together like never before in order to fight against this legislation.

Emory students that attended seemed to be the largest group of students from a school in the southeast. Even during this time period, to the outside world, Emory was a school of tolerance and acceptance. What was interesting in the article, however, was how students felt at the march as well as after. Students felt very comfortable and accepted at the march in Washington. One student said, “There were so many gay people that I felt like we were the norm and not the outcast.” After returning to Atlanta, the same student said “upon returning to Atlanta I felt really empty and sad because it was like crawling back into a closet.” When we think of Atlanta we do not think about the time period that Atlanta was not the hub of LGBT acceptance. On the same campus that we walk everyday, the same buildings we walk into, are full of a history of suppressed sexuality and non acceptance. For those students that did not attend the march, it was because of fear. Fear of not being accepted by their peers and being typecasted and outcasted. It is worth taking a moment to wonder, do we still have this issue today?

Undoubtedly, we still have talks about men on the “down low” and how this affects women and relationships. The fact that this is an issue that the nation has been dealing says a lot about how we perceive some males. As Keith Boykin says in “10 Things You Should Know About the DL,” “the DL is not simply a gay thing,” and it is a “distraction from the real issues.” If all we want to do is stigmatize and say how it affects others how do we expect for people to come out of the “closet”?

Truth is, Emory is not as evolved as it claims to the public. There are still stigmas placed on those part of LGBT. The LGBT office has been putting on the annual drag show for the past 7 years. The fact that it took that long for this type of event to come on campus says something about Emory’s readiness to be this accepting students who possess sexuality outside the “norm.” The Hardwick Decision was overturned by the Supreme Court in 2003, and LGBT at Emory had their first drag show the following year. Regardless of how Emory is as a campus, the politics of the nation determine a lot of the atmosphere and comfortability for students.

Economic theory has been recognized and applied to our behavior since Darwin first discovered the works of Thomas Malthus. In order for there to be evolution, there must be a limited supply of resources and consequently some competition for those resources. In every species, a mate is a resource. Our biological fitness relies on our ability to find a mate and pass on our genes. The current sex situation in our society is a result of the influence of two things on this innate behavior. First of all, many people have figured out that sex can be enjoyable (thus we want it despite having no current aspirations for reproduction) and second, as a general rule humans have developed into a dual gender courtship species, thereby requiring displays of affection, charms, and expressions of interest from both men and women.

A change occurred in the 1960s and 1970s in American society that has liberated women from the stigma of sex before marriage. It’s certainly not gone, but with the increasing education of women, the delay of marriage in favor of furthering careers, and the general acceptance that marriage is simply not the road for everyone, women are increasingly likely to engage in pre-marital sex and to be comfortable with it. This on it’s own can be a very good thing. As Windsor and Burgess advocate, having a sex-positive outlook is much healthier because it makes knowledge and education accessible and leads to healthier, happier people. 

The problem however, is that women in our age group (18-23) are not happier. This freedom they have been granted has not promoted sex-positivity and openness. It has lead instead to the economizing of sexual acts,discouraging some individuals and decreasing the frequency of healthy sexual relationships.

In 2011, sociologists Regnerus and Uecker, of University of Texas and University of North Carolina respectively, published a book about the way young Americans engage in relationships and decide how they will progress. After a decade of study they reported that women who have had multiple sex partners are ten times more likely to experience elevated symptoms of depression. These results occurred after the onset of sexual behavior. Proof of a causal relationship was not proven but a definite correlation was seen. Some men and many women reported feeling disrespected after engaging in casual sex.

The researchers also found that “men are typically in control of when dating begins, but women are in control of when sex begins—and it often begins earlier than they want.” This is a slightly different argument than Kathleen Bogle’s (Hooking Up) who portrayed the struggle of developing relationships in a hook up culture, yet it follows the same logic. Television, movies, and our parents (or fathers) frequently reinforce the stereotypes. Men want sex and women either give it to them or they don’t. The problem comes from the different points at which women find it appropriate to allow sexual activity. Regnerus and Uecker went on to report that “women are increasingly competing with each other for the affections of increasingly rare high-quality men who are willing to commit.” In a world where sex is easier to acquire, more men are less enticed by the idea of committing to just one mate. Women don’t necessarily see the difference so they end up moving faster sexually than they would otherwise choose in a non-competitive environment for fear of losing the man to someone who moves faster than them.

College is probably the best time and place to see how these changes effect women. In the past, there were always far more men on campuses than women and consequently, men had to work harder to secure a date. Now that most colleges enroll an equal or greater proportion of women than men, the opportunities abound for men looking to find a new partner. As evident in Bogle’s book, women “hook up” with men often believing that it will lead to something more. This pretty much jumps the starting point that Uecker and Regnerus assume comes first. The point where a man initiates a date doesn’t have to arise on the timeline at all, let alone first. Women are basically doing this to ourselves. We hear it constantly. We even spout advice to our friends that we then ignore ourselves. Hook ups could have potential. There’s always the exception, right?

Sure there’s a double standard, but basically we as a group are creating it. By not voicing what we want and giving in, we make it less and less about men competing for sex, and more about women competing for relationships.

Evolution is all about promotion of the most fit behaviors. The number of men accustomed to not having to work for sex will likely increase until something changes in women’s behavior. It’s simple economics, “when women compete for men, men win: the price of sex goes down.”

Darwin, Charles. On the Origin of Species. John Murray Publishing. 1859

Bogle, Kathleen. “Hooking Up: Men, Women, and the Sexual Double Standard.” NYU Press. 2008

Windsor, Elroi and Elisabeth Burgess. “Sex Matters: Future Visions for a Sex-Positive Society.” Allyn and Bacon. 2003

Premarital Sex in America. How Young Americans Meet, Mate, and Think About Marrying. Mark Regnerus, Jeremy Uecker. Oxford University Press, 2011

A Man’s World. “The sexual economics of college campuses empower men at the expense of women.” World Magazine. Marvin Olasky. May 20, 2011 http://www.worldmag.com/2011/05/a_man_s_world

Factors that Shape One’s Sexuality

 Talks with S

 10/20/2012

We have been discussing about giving one the “freedom” or “choice” to choose ones own sexuality. The question that I plan to answer in today’s blog is: How does one choose this sexuality? What were the experiences that one may have encountered that ultimately formed or shaped their sexuality?

An individual’s gender and sexual identity, the attributes related to it, and their behavior are shaped by experiences encountered by them their entire life. The phrase “entire life” includes their childhood, pre-adolescence, adolescence, later-adolescence,
adulthood, and even their later life. This includes their interactions with their families, friends and intimate relationships with their partners (DeLamater and Friedrich 63). It is believed that ones sexual interests and desires begin the moment one is born into the world, and continue to formulate until we die. DeLamater and Friedrich in Human Sexual Development, talk about “childhood” as the time in ones life where one establishes certain kind of preferences for certain kind of stimulations, which then persist throughout ones lifetime. The simple act of a child sucking on his or her toes and fingers is seen as a “natural form of sexual expression” (DeLamater and Friedrich 64).

An essential element of any kind of mature relationship with a partner is based on “attachment” -emotional and physical. This attribute is said to blossom during ones childhood. The physical contact of a child with his or her parents that brings out warmth, security, and a comforting feeling helps shape this attachment in a positive spectrum. If this physical contact is negative, it leads to insecurities with oneself, discomfort at the idea or actual sensation of someone else’s touch and even identifying others as always having bad motives. Sometimes these all possibilities may be valid, if a child has encountered a traumatic experience of being raped or assaulted as a child. This “childhood” phase of ones life is often regarded as a stage when one is not sexual or has no quantitative idea of what sexuality really is. This has been therefore proven as a myth in Human Sexual Development. 

The next stage in an individual’s life is the pre- adolescence phase when he or she gains experiences with masturbation, and experiences sexual attractions with other individuals. When an individual reaches the actual adolescence stage, he or she is deemed as having become “sexually mature” in terms of sexual interest, emotional compatibility and physical viability. In the later stages of adolescence, between ages 16 to 19 years, an individual establishes his or her gender identity. Establishing this gender identity is an essential component of establishing their identity as a whole. DeLamater and Friedrich state,

Early childhood is also [in addition to several other important experiences that a child may witness during this stage] a period during which each child forms a gender identity, a sense of maleness or femaleness (64).

In today’s society, a parent or a guardian will expect, or rather want a child (set to be in his or her “childhood” stage) to be inclined towards playing with dolls as a symbolism of her “femaleness” or play with gun toys or ninja figures as a symbolism of his “maleness”. It is, however, in the “later adolescence” stage that ones sexual identity truly emerges. Individuals entering this “later adolescence” stage may choose their identity as either homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual or the like. In my opinion, this is the most critical stage in ones lifetime. This is so because- at this “later adolescence” stage one chooses his or her identity, after which only can he or she move towards establishing a stable lifestyle with self-confidence and maturity.

When one enters the “adulthood” stage he or she is regarded as having the full emotional and physical maturity to “make informed decisions about reproduction and prevention of sexually transmitted infection, including HIV infection” (DeLamater and Friedrich 66). It is in the “adulthood” stage when concepts such as “marriage”, “living together” and “getting pregnant” are common notions. DeLamater and Friedrich state,

Some adults engage in sexual activities that involve risks to their physical health, such as STI’s ad HIV infection. Examples of such activities include engaging in vaginal or anal intercourse without using condoms, engaging in sexual activity with casual partners and engaging in sex with multiple partners (67).

The use of condoms and other contraceptives is now witnessed as coherent with “sexual health”. Many believe that these measures are ideal; and can be viewed an integral step towards protection of oneself against unwanted diseases, that one may get from an unknown or unfaithful partner. In some peoples view, mainly the individuals belonging to a societal group that call themselves “pro-life”, “to be prepared” equates being “loose” (Simonds 428).

Having sex before marriage is one concept, however, having sex before marriage and getting pregnant with or without use of contraceptives is another ball game all together. It is only recently, since the late 20^th century that the use of “contraception has not shared the social stigma as abortion” (Simonds 428). Based on the decisions one makes during “adulthood”, one may or may not use contraceptives to avoid getting pregnant. The “pro- choice” deem it their right to abort a baby after getting pregnant had they used a contraceptive measure or not. They wish to regard this process only as a “chosen activity” (Simonds 428). On the other hand, “pro-life” or anti-abortionists state, “the aborting woman is selfish and self indulgent” (Simonds 428) and regard these aborting women, profit-making doctors and clinic workers as “baby killers” (Simonds 427 & 428). They even predict the collapse of patriarchal heterosexual family unit as a result of continued abortions. This typical “heterosexual family unit” includes a man and woman married with a child. Even DeLamater and Friedrich state,

Marriage is the most common sexual lifestyle in the United States. Marriage is the social context in which sexual expression is thought to be most legitimate (66).

The question that then comes to mind is: What about a woman getting pregnant when she isn’t married? Is she now required to get married, because she is pregnant, or should she be allowed to abort the child because she isn’t and doesn’t want to get married? According to the poll data mentioned in From Contraception to Abortion: A Moral Continuum, “a large majority [public data collected] supports abortion when a pregnant woman’s life is endangered by the pregnancy, when her pregnancy resulted from rape or incest, or when the fetus is ‘defective’ (Simonds 428). This data is said to have smaller support if the woman may want to abort the child due to reasons such as interference with work or education or affordability. The entire article talks about a “woman” not wanting or aborting a baby. The question that arises to my mind is what about “men” wanting the woman to abort the baby? What about the woman wanting to keep the baby but not being able to keep the baby as she alone cannot after to raise a child without financial support from the biological father of the child? What about a situation where the husband is now deceased and the woman not wanting to raise a child that reminds her of her deceased husband? There are so many situations that need to be considered before taking a stance.

The “pro-choice” identify motherhood as a choice that is personal to them, and since its their body that will have to bare the child, they should have the “choice” to abort the fetus if they consider themselves unworthy of being a mother. Although this seemed justifiable to me at first, I soon changed my thoughts when I related it to another concept all together: suicide. If we are “not allowed” by law to harm our own bodies even though it is ultimately our own body, then the government is right in a way to make the practice of abortion “illegal” in some aspects.

Issues of having sex before marriage, the elderly having sex, abortion, assault, etc. are topics that do not have one single justifiable answer, as each individual’s story pertaining to each one of these topics is different and cannot be pinned down to one correct solution. Various “cultural attitudes” (Simonds 429) suffice in society that may diverge one to take a particular decision. These decisions that one may take as an adult (most countries acknowledging this as 18 years and older) and the experiences one may encounter throughout ones lifetime- covering all phases of life from birth to death- help to shape ones sexuality. Since “human beings are sexual beings throughout their entire lives” (DeLamater and Friedrich 64), changes in ones sexuality during the course of their lives may also occur after “developing greater understanding of oneself or [their] partner” (DeLamater and Friedrich 67).

Citations:

DeLamater, John D. and Friedrich, William N. “Human Sexual Development”

Simonds Wendy. “From Contraception to Abortion: A Moral Continuum”