So... I've Been Reading The News Again...
Well, there is talk in the news that us lady lovers can obtain 6 cycles of fertility treatment on the NHS, along with single ladies also wanting babies. Except, if Kate and I were to put ourselves down for that treatement, we'd both be denied. Why? I am fat and she smokes. Read it here.
(Kate and I are not thinking of starting a family. We have 5 cats and a hamster. This is just an example)
Fair enough. So what about fat ladies and smoking ladies who get pregnant the usual way? What fate awaits them in the future? Will women be screened to see if they are fit enough to have babies because the NHS is looking to save a few bucks? Will families be screened and their DNA tested so that no child is born with an inherited condition that would strain the NHS?
Are we staring into the beedy little eye of BIG BROTHER?
Also in the news is the ban on violent porn, with viewers of such to face 3 years imprisonment. Who determines what is violent and what is not? I predict much controversy over this one. I am not a fan of violent porn myself, so this ban doesn't affect me at all. What it does do is make me wonder what else might be banned?
Feminist Andrea Dworkin viewed every sex act between men and women as a form of rape and found pornography in some of the most innocuous things.
Most interesting. Your views?
As it happens, I am against IVF treatments full stop, and not for "messing with Nature" reasons. If you (as in "one") are so desperate to have a child, adopt one, it's not like there's a shortage of kids who need a loving family. I don't understand why money and time is devoted to things like fertility treatments, when there is still no cure for some real diseases/illness/conditions that are potentially fatal.
ReplyDeleteRe the violent-porn ban, I'm not sure I know enough about it to express an opinion. But I wonder if Liz Longhurst got the wrong end of the stick going after the porn industry. If I understood correctly, her daughter was killed accidentally, while engaging in a spot of (consensual, one would hope) strangulation. The same thing that happened to Michael Hutchence, virtually... There will always be people who experiment with scarves, stockings or whatever even without ever having been exposed to violent porn.
Pie: I reckon that what they are most likely going for is the stuff that probably looks too 'real'. If they are going to be super strict about it then some blogs I've come across may no longer remain.
ReplyDeleteRed: I agree with you on adoption - it's what Kate and I would end up doing if we decided to have kids. (Now that having two lesbian moms is ok. My personal take is that IVF is a selfish exercise - for the same reasons you have cited. The issue has concerned me more because of the discrimination of certain people rather than anything else. GPs debated recently whether or not they should treat obese patients for obesity related illness. I fully understand WHY they wouldn't.
And thanks for your take on the porn thing - I hadn't thought about it that way.
Hmmm... the IVF thing is a slippery slope isn't it - it makes sense but where will it end?
ReplyDeleteIf it were up to me ALL people wanting to procreate should have to pass some sort of test - not only in terms of physical health!
As for the porn thing - banning anything only makes it more desirable to the masses. They should rather deal with it via education - as in "don't try this at home kids!"
I'm with Red on IVF/adoption (but then, I guess I would be, or else we'd need to have a sit-down). I can see certain logic in denying treatment to fat people and smokers from a financial standpoint if the success rate is likely to be low, but I also think it's unfair and is tantamount to saying "You're not allowed to breed," whereas no one is stopping hetero fat smokers from breeding.
ReplyDeleteOn the violent-porn thing: I was going to post about this myself yesterday but I sort of missed my moment. From what I understand, the girl did die during consensual strangulation games. It's unfortunate, but it's death by misadventure. That said, violent porn is already strictly legislated by the BBFC here (i.e., it's illegal); the problem is that pesky Internet.
The key word here is possession. Not distribution. Just owning something that someone somewhere considers violent is to be an offence. Does this include stuff with needles, bondage, machines. Y'all know the stuff. Controversial, and a lot of wasted court time I predict.
Here in the U.S., I've missed this controversy. I'm a little confused as to how "extreme porn" equates to consensual choking during sex. I've engaged in this ridiculous, but fun behavior, but have never seen this kind of porn. I don't see how they relate. BTW, a release word is crucial...and I don't know the story, but it sounds like she went out having fun!
ReplyDeleteSo first I see I have to chuck out half my porn...then this happens (from BBC News Website):
ReplyDeleteThe growth of cervical and womb cancers may be fuelled by a hormone-like molecule in semen, a study suggests.
So now I can't have sex either...
I've gone right off the news.