Why? I HAD a heavy sex drive when I was in my twenties, and the upshot of it was that I chose to not be at all selective about the men with whom I consorted. This was MOSTLY harmless, but I did experience a bit of negative fallout now and again. In retrospect, I'd have rather not had such a heavy sex drive, and I feel that it would have been better to have based my amorous activities on having had some genuine feelings for the men, rather than just satisfying passing lusty urges.

For me, it's SUCH A RELIEF to care minimally-to-not-at-all about sex. I feel that my former behavior lacked dignity.

I could envision this spray being helpful for women who are in an established loving and respectful relationship who just don't "feel the urge" and who risk having their mates go outside of their relationship in order to fulfill their sexual needs.

I can also envision it as being not-at-all helpful for women if were to be used as a tool by lazy, selfish, and self-centered men who want to take shortcuts around having to make an effort to be appealing to and supportive of their mate/women-in-general. And I can also envision it as ushering a new standard for ALL women to be "hot-to-trot" 24/7, regardless of whether this type of behavior suits the woman's personality or the prospective sex partner/sexual experience would be beneficial for her.

...he should take a gander at the "I'm not sorry" Web site.

The sole purpose of that site is to counter the anti-abortion movement's claims that every woman regrets her decision to abort and is permanently psychologically scarred by the experience.

(As for me, "I'm not sorry" that I got a tubal ligation at a tender age. And if I'd ever become pregnant accidentally, I'm certain that I'd not have been sorry to have terminated the pregnancy ASAP--'though that sort of thing has to remain firmly in the realm of theory. Truly, there are some people on this Earth who should not be parents, and I happen to be one of them.)

...is to stop Planned Parenthood from being able to provide health care to ANYONE. Their sole agenda is to see that any and all unplanned babies get born, no matter the consequences to those babies' parents. Remember: The most extreme Planned Parenthood foes truly believe that all hormonal birth control is a de facto abortifacient. And some of those folks believe that this country started to go downhill, morally, when it became legal to dispense condoms--to MARRIED PEOPLE(!). Yes, these folks want to send us all back to the Good Ol' Days of "Angela's Ashes," when Catholic parents couldn't (wouldn't?) plan their families, and children literally starved to death. But at least those kids got to be born (and baptized).

Planned Parenthood has every right to sue these folks. And that's exactly what those folks WANT to have happen, because it's their intention to subpoena every confidential medical record and all personnel records in Planned Parenthood's offices, in the name of "discovery." We can well-imagine what illegal use to which they'd put that information.

In California, we have a "safe haven" law that has the purpose of giving women who've given birth a safe way to "dump" their newborn babies at certain public facilities--an alternative that preserves their anonymity and has no legal consequences for them...or to whomever fathered their children. This law has saved hundreds of babies (and it COULD save hundreds more, if every girl or woman who wanted to hide the fact that she'd given birth would avail herself of this law). If these Planned Parenthood harassers were to be consistent in their POV, however, they'd surely be against the "safe haven" law, because it potentially allows adult men to father children by minors with impunity. I never saw those folks objecting to that law when it was being debated, and the reason is because they don't really care about minor girls--they only care that as many babies as possible get born. And when they've accomplished that goal, they'll set to work on ensuring that ever-more babies get conceived in the first place.