I don't think it's your testicles that are defective.

I've never been a fan of Fractelle, but really cant imagine her wanting to even think about your testicles, or caring whether you have kids.

I'm sorry, I normally wouldn't care, but you really are starting to sound like HRS on this thread.

Hey guys,

this judgemental police style castigation and admonishment from a high horse of moral superiority is fun isn't it?

Houellebecq:"I don't think it's your testicles that are defective."

Self-evidently not. One doesn't father two kids with defective taddy factories.

Houellebecq:"cant imagine her wanting to even think about your testicles, or caring whether you have kids."

She may not want to, but I bet she does when she reads this thread...

Fractelle/Severin, "I do also agree with Cornflower's proposal that the pill be more available, particularly for third world women, however to suggest that it is not without side-effects and is safer than paracetamol is irresponsible at best and ignorant at worst."

Would you concede that the pill is responsible for less damage than table salt? What about alcohol?

Or that it is less risky than a normal pregnancy. The side effects of pregnancy, the horror!

You revel in the benefits of a sexual revolution that you obviously did not fight for and now you would deny the benefits to others. Where access to the Pill is denied or restricted there can be no sexual revolution.

However just to repeat, there is no medical justification for requiring healthy young women to attend and pay for medical consultations for routine refreshment of their script for the Pill.

The 'Gate Keeping' deters some women from obtaining the contraceptives they need.

Restricted access to any drug should be based on evidence - independent assessment of relative risk.

It is unconscionable that the female contraceptive pill has not been made freely available - free access, nil cost - (not your grudging "more available") to women in developing countries. It is absolute absurd to claim that it would present any more than a minuscule fraction of the risks already suffered by such women. In fact it would significantly reduce known serious risks to their health and dramatically improve their sense of wellbeing and quality of life. Goodness, some might even get some education.

In closing, it is absolutely frivolous to say, as one poster did, that "the contraceptive pill was certainly the start of a form of liberation during the sexual revolution for women, in that they had more say in when and if they became pregnant." A "form of liberation", what a load of the proverbial, are some keyboard 'feminists' so jealous of a tiny pill that they feel obliged to minimise the watershed for the advancement of humanity that the Pill was then and now?

Houellebecq:"cant imagine her wanting to even think about your testicles, or caring whether you have kids."

Anti: "She may not want to, but I bet she does when she reads this thread..."

An hour after Anti posted this, Severin started her "who would you turn gay for" thread. The thought of Anti's testes was just too much.

Nope, that's it for me on this rapidly degenerating thread.

The thought of 'septic testicles just has me reaching for the nearest bucket.......