Letters posted here are associated with the following Salon Premium Member:
Published Letters: 77
Editor's Choice: 7
"Having a family, family sickness, childbirth, end of life care, etc, those are all serious life issues that require attention, they are not choices."
Um, no. Two of four are things you choose to engage in -- others are social contracts that you're entangled in through no choice of your own. "Having a family," for example, is a discriminatory way of terming "getting pregnant with a committed partner," and it's entirely voluntary -- as proven by a number of people in the world who CHOOSE not to do it, approximately 20% of the population.
"Its on par with a single person getting sick and being forced into early retirement because "its unfair to let them do less work for the same pay.""
False, and it happens every day to people who are in or not in a variety of relationships.
As for the 20-some hip person...it really doesn't matter who's sitting in that movie theater. The fact of the matter is that the rest of us deserve to get what we paid for -- not squalling or cooing or rude comments or distractions in our workplaces. And if infants constitute any of these, no one other than the folks who chose to conceive and give birth to them should be compelled to deal with them.
My employer offers a cafeteria insurance plan.
Plan A covers everything deemed necessary or routine at the same rate. So childbirth is subsidized, but you're a whole lot less likely to opt for something which is more expensive if the choice is yours since you'll be paying for 20% of it.
Plan B covers most of the usual childbirth stuff -- I understand that a c-section on that plan will cost you about $3,000.
Plan C covers all maternity visits, childbirth, and the first well child visit for about $50.
My opinion is that th letters section functions like a forum, rather than an actual letter section. therefore it kills the actual discussion forum.
I had two granddads and a dad, all of whom were loving, supportive folks. So I don't buy the base assumption of old dad = bread-earning, emotionally distant guy.
I like sucking cock. I like going down on girls, too. I never really think of it as humiliating other than when someone's trying to make me do it when I'm not interested or said person wants some, but doesn't want to reciprocate.
And the meaning of the act, I feel, is all about context. For example, for five years I had a boyfriend who wouldn't allow me to go down on him. Some people might take his refusal as a sign of respect, but it was symptomatic of other issues in the relationship -- namely that he was untrusting and unwilling to relax enough to enjoy being given the gift of pleasure. So it was a sign of being unwilling to really let me get close to him as well as a sign of a lack of acceptance. What's empowering about that?
I say if Hooters is willing to support the animal organization, then let them. 'Cause, heck, they need every penny they can get. and as a bonus they get exposure to the Hooters audience, which might not be their usual one.
Pro-personal autonomy?
Pro-self-determination?
Pro-privacy in medical care?
Pro-hippocratic oath?
Pro-compassion in care?
...and I didn't find the article that appalling. But then, while I haven't ever been accused of being a neat freak, I have decided not to date someone based on the contents of their apartment. Which is to say the litter box they don't clean, the obsessive-compulsive folded and ironed boxer shorts, the pizza boxes stacked on the table, the mounds of cigarettes, the kitty fur tumbleweeds holding the roommate hostage, the obsessive need to get up after knockin' boots and clean the kitchen counter. All of those are deal breakers. So are Thomas Kincade paintings and Precious Moments paraphernalia and heartfelt talks about Jesus. What's wrong with that, exactly? All of these have something in common, which is that they indicate we're not compatible and we won't be working toward the same aims.
The issue with the article is its implications being targeted to women -- but there's nothing wrong with no pursuing a relationship with someone whose notions of home are very different than yours.