A little off-topic, but something occurred to me the other day ...
The sexual revolution was largely driven by The Pill. Oral contraceptives for women allowed a lot of behavior that had previously been held in check. Today we sometimes hear about oral contraceptives that men might take, in order to make them temporarily infertile.
But let’s step beyond fertility.
For how many people is sex a distraction? If teens were to focus on school or sports instead of chasing each other, would the world be better? If single people all took a pill that removed sexual desire, and then, after getting married to a suitable partner, if they stopped taking that pill, and discovered a wonderful, magical world within the confines of a committed marriage, wouldn’t that be nice?
We have birth control — so people can have more sex.
We have viagra — so people can have more sex.
Why doesn’t science ever try to make something so that people could have less sex? So that society could be less sex-obsessed? I think it’s because the global economy is largely driven by sexual unhappiness. Making desire go away, would affect a lot of bank accounts.
Depo-Provera is used the lessen sex drives in male sex criminals.
Interesting concept, if accompanied with a pill that extended middle age.
Cheaper than a pill to remove sexual desire would be a screen saver with a photo of Hillary Clinton.
I think decreasing the male sex drive would make the world fall apart faster.
Men without interest in women are destructive rather than creative and constructive.
I don’t want to live in a world where men are essentially feminized. No thank you.
“The sexual revolution was largely driven by The Pill.”
Not sure on this. I believe it was driven by the removal of religious respect when the schools took out prayer so the kids could be exposed to it. And then things like Woodstock, and places like Haight-Ashbury and Venice Beach in California, Seattle, Washington and Portland, Oregon in the northwest, Delano South Beach, Florida, New York and New Orleans are hot spots for the “sexual revolution.”
But the pill was just a tool. And it wasn’t effective as more and more women out of wedlock were getting pregnant, many unwanted, although it has lessoned over the last few years. And there are numerous forms of birth control now avaialble with even young women as early as age 13 can now independently make decisions on their use.
So it isn’t the tool. It’s the user and the parents who should be teaching children more about sexual decisions and not letting the same people that think they are tasked with this along with their decision to pass out condoms to everyone even into grammar schools and as young as 5th grade students, roughly 10 years old.
wy69
Let me tell you about my prostate cancer medicine...