Mister Bump UK

Go with the Flow

Prompt image for the Truthful Tuesday prompt

I thought Melanie asked a decent Truthful Tuesday question this week.

Birth control?   Pro or con.  Please explain.

I’ve never minded using birth control. No philosophical objection to it. Which partner uses it, I don’t care. I always preferred it (a better sensation) if she did, but “not getting pregnant” took precedence over how it felt. It felt pretty good anyhow.

Usually. I was not always consistent. When I was about 20, my girlfriend and I played Russian Roulette for a couple years, and got away with it, which made me believe I was firing blanks. But as I got older I was more careful.

After our daughter was born, Mrs Bump and I didn’t use contraception because we’d have quite liked to have another child. It just never happened.

The reason I was happy to use contraception is because I’ve no problem using any science that helps produce a more desirable outcome (in this case not having a baby). Even if nothing more technical than a rubber barrier.

In the same vein I’ve got no objection to using science to intervene to divert the natural flow of events in other areas. Examples include radio- or chemotherapy to treat cancers, or any number of drugs which don’t exist naturally. (I have to be careful here because many drugs do occur naturally, just not in useful concentrations.) For example, the insulin I take every day. Even the humble x-ray we use when we break a bone. Doesn’t exist in nature. Not so you can photograph a broken bone.

That’s cut and dry. The reason I find this question interesting is this “going against nature” aspect. If someone is against birth control, because it diverts the natural flow, are they also against e.g. medicine? Because that also diverts the natural flow? Presumably they wouldn’t have taken a COVID vaccine, because that diverted the natural flow?

16 comments

  2. I don’t get the “disrupting the natural flow” argument. As you pointed out, we do a lot that disrupts the natural flow, like eating meat that is slaughtered at factory farms. That’s not the natural flow, is it? How about processed food? How about when the man pulls out just before reaching climax? Disrupting the natural flow, right? Sorry, Pete, but I think it’s a spurious argument.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    • why else would somebody claim to be anti-contraception, though. But yes, itr is easy to find counter examples.
      There is broadly this narrative through time. First, people didn’t have a clue about anything so they worshipped gods, then gradually they began to learn tiny bits and pieces about how nature works. To suggest “natural flow” is tantamount to suggesting that we set all that accumulated knowledge to one side. Seems counter-evolutionary.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    • Sorry, Michele, but what you say doesn’t make sense.
      You say you’re for body autonomy, right?
      Then you should be applauding these people for exercising… body autonomy!
      Different priorities come into play at different times of our lives. There are rational arguments on both sides. You are absolutely wrong to dismiss these people as idiots.
      Not least, we now know that the vaccines did not do one of the key things they were badged to do – prevent people catching COVID, There is still an enormous infection rate.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a reply to Nope, Not Pam Cancel reply