Culture of Life

[L1o2u3]

On 5.6.2017 at 11:11 PM, GeoBQn said:

Captain Awkward posted an update of sorts.  She did not allow comments on the original post because she knew that moderating that comment section was going to be a warzone.  Instead, her inbox got flooded with people asking her to "set the record straight" on NFP and "give it a fair hearing."  She posted this in response.

https://captainawkward.com/2017/06/05/969-moderation-mop-up/

Oh wow. That is a mature response. Well, it is not. She doesn't even want to research if NFP is safe or not. I totally agree that it doesn't seem to be the right method for the letter writer, but that still isn't a reason to bash it. And apparantly I wasn't the only one that didn't like that she didn't set the record straight. Which doesn't surprise me at all. She could have just said "NFP is actually very safe, if learned and done properly, but it's totally okay if it doesn't work for you" and put that somewhere in her response. Instead, she gets bitchy. Wow. I think I should send her an email as well

[Foudeb]

 

 

10 hours ago, L1o2u3 said:

Oh wow. That is a mature response. Well, it is not. She doesn't even want to research if NFP is safe or not. I totally agree that it doesn't seem to be the right method for the letter writer, but that still isn't a reason to bash it. And apparantly I wasn't the only one that didn't like that she didn't set the record straight. Which doesn't surprise me at all. She could have just said "NFP is actually very safe, if learned and done properly, but it's totally okay if it doesn't work for you" and put that somewhere in her response. Instead, she gets bitchy. Wow. I think I should send her an email as well

Whether NFP is safe or not isn't the topic she's discussing. It's an agony aunt column not a forum on contraceptive choices.

TMI alert: I've used NFP + condoms for over 10 years now and it works for me. I've had relatives, a whole lot of medical professionals, well-meaning friends and a partner who were everything from disapproving to appalled and they all tried to talk me into going on the pill. Because safety! and reliability! and no more periods! which is all true. But.

A) I'm an adult

B ) I can think.

So I am familiar with all their reasons, I am aware of the advantages and benefits of the pill and of my chosen method of contraception, and I made a choice between the two using what's between my ears. Constantly telling me that I'm wrong, and irresponsible, and silly is beyond annoying. It is questioning my intelligence and decision-making skills on something that is deeply intimate and personal. And this despite, you know, my never having had an unwanted pregnancy.

The letter-writer is in the exact opposite situation - everyone around her is already going but NFP! Religion! just count your days better! have you not been charting the state of your cervical mucus on your phone! and this despite NFP demonstrably not having worked for her (see child #4). What good exactly does it make to "set the record straight" by telling her she's making the wrong choice, or doing it wrong? It would be doing the exact. same. thing. that anti-NFP people are doing!

And I'm saying this from the perspective of someone who does wish people, and especially medical professionals, were better educated on NFP. It's a conversation I have pretty much every single time I speak with a doctor - "oh can't prescribe you this because it's counter-indicated with the pill... what do you mean you're not on the pill? what do you mean fertility window? but that's unreliable, you could get pregnant at any time" etc etc ad nauseam.

There should be more info on contraception, but the final decision on what to use is down to the individual using it. End of.

[GeoBQn]

So I guess you are the one responsible for this, L1o2u3?

https://captainawkward.com/2017/06/07/969-moderation-mop-up-continued-because-people-are-still-emailing-me-their-thoughts-about-how-a-fellow-human-being-should-manage-her-own-body/

The bottom line is she doesn't have to "set the record straight."  This is her blog, she is giving advice to one person who wrote to her--a letter writer who is presumably an expert on her own life and needs--and this is not the only website that could possibly provide information on NFP to those who are interested.

[L1o2u3]

And she still doesn't get the point  

It is also funny to see how she reads things I've never said

[L1o2u3]

It is hilarious. The website she linked to in her response with informations about contraception also has multiple wrong statements about NFP/FAM in their articles  

[NachosFlandersStyle]

1 hour ago, L1o2u3 said:

And she still doesn't get the point  

It is also funny to see how she reads things I've never said

Ugh, you were really the one who wrote that? Fuck off, you're the one who doesn't get the point. And you come off like an immature troll.

[GeoBQn]

Are you talking about the link to Scarleteen?

http://www.scarleteen.com/article/sexual_health/birth_control_bingo

http://www.scarleteen.com/birth_control_bingo_fertility_awareness

What is wrong about it?

[L1o2u3]

It says that FAM requires a speculum and a mirror (neither Weschler's, nor Nofziger's nor the Sensiplan method do require a speculum or a mirror, there might be some variants out there that I don't know, but saying that it generally requires these things is wrong) and it says that your cycles need to be regular, that is also wrong, it might just lead to longer periods of abstinence/protected intercourse, but the method would still work (this might be impractical for some people, but you can still detect the infertile and fertile days and there are special exceptional rules which could  be applied in some cases, eg. the basic infertility pattern for the cervical mucus). And that the cycles would have to be regular for five years before starting the method (no, you could basically start after your first period) and that you need to practise at least six months (even though I think this would be a good idea, there are rules that can be applied  when you don't have enough cycles yet, rules that can be applied if you tracked your cycle before starting NFP etc.). 

 

I also don't like that they don't differentiate on the different variants of the method, because their safety and rules do vary. But well, I didn't expect them to do that. 

[EowynW]

Also using NFP + Condom but also with spermicide because we are trying to be extra careful. It works well for us but it isn't for everyone. No method is for everyone. 

 

You can love your method but still recognize it isn't for everyone. I decided to stop changing people's minds a long time ago.  

[infooverload]

Honestly I find it ridiculous she is having to justify her decision to switch birth control methods. Men granted have more limited choices, but it isn't a publicly domain discussed issue by and large. This boils down to letting people have self agency over their own health decisions. Instead she is saddled by an institution whose power structure and authority don't have to raise said children.

[SoybeanQueen]

If you're sensitive to commentary from people who don't understand (and really don't care that much to understand) Catholic sex rules, please skip this. My intent is not to offend you specifically, and I'm not looking for details on what a religion other than my own says about it.

If Catholic sex is supposed to be procreative all the time, then how is sex at a non-fertile time any different from a hormonal birth control method? It's equally as possible to get pregnant on hormonal birth control as it is to get pregnant when you are not fertile, possibly more so (to be fair, I haven't researched these rates). I got pregnant while taking BCPs. I did not ever get pregnant while using NFP. So.... I guess for me, it's less sinful and more procreative to take BCPs?

I don't understand the whole "open to life" thing, to be honest. If one believes God is ultimately in control, they must also believe a pill is not too great an obstacle if the Lord wants a soul to be born.

21 hours ago, L1o2u3 said:

 She could have just said "NFP is actually very safe, if learned and done properly, but it's totally okay if it doesn't work for you" and put that somewhere in her response. Instead, she gets bitchy.

She isn't obligated to go into the pros or cons of a birth control method the poster has no interest in because it already failed her for whatever reason. Is she also obligated to go into detail for every other birth control method ever, making sure to say it's OK if it doesn't work for that person? Condoms are really effective if used correctly each time, but it's totally OK if those don't work for you!

There's a subset of NFP users who seem to think the failures are a feature, not a bug. If you don't want more children, and your birth control fails, that is not a wondrous thing, and it's perfectly fine to be opposed to using that method again. Anyone who attempts to sway that person into giving NFP another try given the circumstances is kind of an asshole.

[L1o2u3]

2 hours ago, SoybeanQueen said:

Anyone who attempts to sway that person into giving NFP another try given the circumstances is kind of an asshole.

And I never said that she had to give it another try. I never tried to sway the letter writer. I totally agree that NFP doesn't seem to be for her (how often do I need to repeat that?). 

The only thing I wished she (not the letter writer, Captain Awkward) had done would have been a sentence like "NFP is actually very safe, when done properly" because this is not just a response to the letter writer, but it is public. Because the lady that wrote the letter didn't just say that NFP is not for her, but she called it "vatican roulette" and said that the fourth pregnancy was "predictable", that NFP "obviously does not work" (she probably means "for  her", but doesn't say that). By saying "all the really effective birth control methods are pretty expensive", she again states that NFP is not effective (for her? probably). And then she says in the end that NFP is " a broken fire escape" . I think that these expressions are pretty strong and while these statements may be true for the letter writer, they are definitely not true for everyone. 

[Foudeb]

@L1o2u3 I think the major distinction is that most of us who use NFP only use it in conjunction with condoms (or spermicide or a diaphragm) at fertile times. Hardcore Catholics aren't allowed to do that, so to them it's a conjunction of NFP and abstinence.

I do believe the abstinence part is the "Vatican roulette" part of the equation. It must be very hard to go from a normal wife-husband relationship to sleeping aside without touching like brother and sister half the time. The only "advice" that can be given is a) track your NFP better to make that less than half the time (and I do believe it can get risky, especially with small kids etc. that might interrupt your daily temping) or b ) have more discipline and self-control, which, I think we can all agree is not helpful at all, not when you're only half the equation, not when you have a normal, healthy marriage.

IMHO it really does boil down to this silly doctrine having been devised by priests who just don't know what it's like to sleep next to someone you're in love with, and attracted to, every night. And also have not experienced being busy with work and life and family and only having occasional date nights that you can't necessarily postpone to fit the schedule. And also, forgive me for being crude, just don't realise how regular intercourse is beneficial to a healthy relationship.

Trust me if priests were allowed marriage the doctrine would be a lot closer to "kids are a blessing and the entire community has a duty to help larger families in any way they can. Family planning is up to every couple and any decisions should be made after lots of thought and prayer."

[sawasdee]

I remember vividly when the encyclical 'Humanae Vitae' was read in our church in the late 60s. This was the Papal letter which confirmed the banning of the use of birth control by catholics.

A month or so later, we had a pastoral letter from the Cardinal-Archbishop of England and Wales, Cardinal Heenan, read in church. Its official subject was conscience, and what it said was that only you can judge your conscience. If your conscience truly told you, after much prayer, that something was not sinful, then no one else could tell you it was.

Most UK catholics took that as the go ahead on birth control. And I believe similar pastoral letters were issued in other countries - mainly in Europe.

I remember at the time, mutterings about the encyclical that 'if priests were married, the rules might be different',,,,,,and the pastoral letter was received with much relief.

[bertnee]

I just read CA's latest post and I cannot believe that people cannot let it go. CA is an advice column, not a reproductive health book. Letter writer is not comfortable using NFP, for whatever the reason and it is not CA's place to extol the virtues of a method of birth control that requires (1) constant vigilance and (2) the commitment of both partners. I've read TAKING CHARGE OF YOUR FERTILITY and I've been charting for 6 months, but guess what, we still use condoms because the consequences are too damn high and I don't trust it yet. And isn't it great that I have a partner who supports my decision about preventing a huge consequence that only affects my body? That's the point.

 

And I can't imagine already having a passel of children and being told by strangers on the Internet that I have to give a particular birth control method another shot because to do otherwise would be an unfeminist. I can't imagine the anxiety I would feel about having to use a method of birth control that I could not trust, every month I would be a knot of fear. I don't want to think about how distressing it must be for poor LW, how stuck she must feel.

 

[Cartmann99]

36 minutes ago, bertnee said:

I just read CA's latest post and I cannot believe that people cannot let it go.

Damn, these folks are worse than a pack of fundies pushing MLM products. 

Use whatever birth control method works best for you, and allow others the same freedom. 

[lawfulevil]

I always distrust the agenda behind giving something an intentionally misleading name, and "Natural Family Planning" is about as "natural" as driving to the grocery store to buy some soy milk. Anything that involves that much 20th century biology research and education, technology, math, and organization isn't "natural" the way the name implies*. I have no problem with technology, but it does make me question why someone would name it that way... and the obvious answer, like the "pro life" movement, is to imply that any other position is the opposite. Pro life versus anti life (or pro death). Natural family planning versus UNnatural family planning- and we all know what "unnatural" means in the Bible.

*

Spoiler

 

Anyway, if that meets your definition of "natural", why wouldn't the Pill?

http://www.mexconnect.com/articles/1245-did-you-know-birth-control-pills-come-from-mexican-yams

 

 

[NachosFlandersStyle]

51 minutes ago, lawfulevil said:

Anything that involves that much 20th century biology research and education, technology, math, and organization isn't "natural" the way the name implies*. I have no problem with technology, but it does make me question why someone would name it that way... and the obvious answer, like the "pro life" movement, is to imply that any other position is the opposite.

 

Much like people who think that mental illness should be treated with, like, yoga and a gluten-free diet, or who think that the internet is ruining "kids these days," the implied value isn't nature, it's effort. How dare you choose a simple and effective solution to your problems? That's cheating, that's the easy way out! You're supposed to have it tough! And if you insist on improving your circumstances, you'd better do it in a complicated, high-effort way so that everyone can see that you really deserve it. It's not unlike arguments for poor people "pulling themselves up by their bootstraps."

[L1o2u3]

I think natural family planning has it's name because it does not interfere with the cycle, like hormones do , and you don't have to  insert anything into the body, like an IUD. At least that's how I understand it. 

[formergothardite]

On 6/7/2017 at 0:08 PM, GeoBQn said:

So I guess you are the one responsible for this, L1o2u3?

https://captainawkward.com/2017/06/07/969-moderation-mop-up-continued-because-people-are-still-emailing-me-their-thoughts-about-how-a-fellow-human-being-should-manage-her-own-body/

The bottom line is she doesn't have to "set the record straight."  This is her blog, she is giving advice to one person who wrote to her--a letter writer who is presumably an expert on her own life and needs--and this is not the only website that could possibly provide information on NFP to those who are interested.

From that link:

Quote

1. NFP is not hard, if learned properly”

Yeah it fucking is for some of us and it is misleading and wrong to claim it isn't. Just remembering to take a pill is hard for some people. 

Quote

This is public on the internet. People with similar problems will look for advice there. You should have set the record straight for them

If someone has a similar problem with the woman who originally wrote that article, then FUCK NO they don't need to be told to try better at NFP because they clearly are in a situation where it doesn't work!

Quote

 it is still one of the best methods available and by telling that NFP is not safe, she’s basically lying.”

In what world is that true?! Talk about lying! Maybe it is the best for some, but it is the worst for some too. It really isn't safe for some people for all sorts of reasons. 

Quote

Please stop being a triggered feminist and return to the facts.”

WTF does this even mean? The fact is NFP didn't fucking work for this woman and any woman in her situation will have found it also didn't work. 

@L1o2u3, did you actually write this?

[TuringMachine]

41 minutes ago, formergothardite said:

Yeah it fucking is for some of us and it is misleading and wrong to claim it isn't. Just remembering to take a pill is hard for some people. 

Yup. Count me as one of those people. I'd be pretty terrible at NFP, and frankly I just don't feel like putting in the effort.

[FakePigtails]

I prefer the term Fertility Awareness Method as used in Taking Charge of Your Fertility. The term natural is so loaded as it is, I say leave that to the Catholic version with no backup contraception, pulling out, or non-PIV orgasms. It makes it more clear too since the latter is such a departure from what most people would ever consider committing to.

[delphinium65]

Birth control bottom line? It's up to you.  I can tell you my ranking of BC methods that I've used from best to worst, which would be Mirena IUD, Depo shot, BC pill, condoms, contraceptive sponge, diaphragm, contraceptive foam, NFP combined with diaphragm or foam-yeah, I know, I've tried a lot, but hey, I'm over 50, that's pretty much my entire child-bearing years we're talking about!  That ranking is absolutely true...for me.  Another woman might have excessive bleeding with an IUD, mood changes and weight gain with Depo or the pill, allergy to latex or spermicides, extremely irregular cycles making NFP much more difficult, and the list goes on and on...or just not like some of them.  You may hate using my favorite, and I may hate using yours, but there's no good reason for either of us to do that.  

Also, if we're talking safety of any given method we have to take into consideration the failure rate and potential complications of pregnancy.  Anyone who claims that BC isn't a health issue has never tried to recover from back to back pregnancies!  

And one more thought...don't tell me that something is better just because it's 'natural.' Manufactured clothing, houses, eyeglasses, computers, books, cell phones, none of those exist in nature, but we use them because they make our lives better.  I'm pretty sure no one reading this is living in a cave, going naked 24/7, or digging for roots and grubs for dinner every day.  

TL/DR:  Decide what you want to use, and use it.  Your body and life, your business!  

[EowynW]

People don't seem to realize pregnancy is HARD on a woman. It takes up to 18 months for some women to fully recover. My SIL is fixing to deliver her 3rd in 3 years. I would die if I had to do that. Not physically maybe but mentally and emotionally. I can see going back to back to get your two kids out of the way and be done with forever, but to just keep pumping them out like that is just hellish sounding to me. 

[formergothardite]

16 minutes ago, delphinium65 said:

 I'm pretty sure no one reading this is living in a cave, going naked 24/7, or digging for roots and grubs for dinner every day.  

Of course I'm not naked! I rolled in mud so much it looks like clothes and it keeps the mosquitoes and ticks away!  My computer is completely natural. The woodland creatures made it as a gift. 

Pregnancy is hard on the body and when you are dealing with sleep deprivation, babies and small children your brain can get foggy and not everyone is going to remember to keep up with the stuff required for NFP to be successful. If it works for someone great, if it doesn't, it really shouldn't be a big deal it didn't work for them. In the end it didn't work for the lady in question and Captain Awkward had no moral obligation to go into a lecture about how it can work for some people.