Boots morning after pill outrage
Discussion
xjay1337 said:
Lord Marylebone said:
So you are happy with high street stores declaring themselves the moral arbiters of society, and deciding what women should or shouldn't be doing?
In my opinion it's the same as putting the cost of a 'quit smoking kit' at £300 and telling people it's because they think you shouldn't be smoking in the first place.
That isn't, and shouldn't be, what Boots is there for. They are there to sell products to customers provided those customers meet the medical requirements of the product, and that should be the extent of Boots involvement.
People have sex. Many women aren't on permanent contraception for various reasons, some medical, and people understandably end up having unplanned sex. I would suggest those that then seek medical help to obtain contraception the next day ARE being responsible and should not be punished for it.
Why should it be free, though? Its not an emergency medical situation.In my opinion it's the same as putting the cost of a 'quit smoking kit' at £300 and telling people it's because they think you shouldn't be smoking in the first place.
That isn't, and shouldn't be, what Boots is there for. They are there to sell products to customers provided those customers meet the medical requirements of the product, and that should be the extent of Boots involvement.
People have sex. Many women aren't on permanent contraception for various reasons, some medical, and people understandably end up having unplanned sex. I would suggest those that then seek medical help to obtain contraception the next day ARE being responsible and should not be punished for it.
Tampax etc aren't free. There is NO EXCUSE for unprotected sex.
xjay1337 said:
Lord Marylebone said:
So you are happy with high street stores declaring themselves the moral arbiters of society, and deciding what women should or shouldn't be doing?
In my opinion it's the same as putting the cost of a 'quit smoking kit' at £300 and telling people it's because they think you shouldn't be smoking in the first place.
That isn't, and shouldn't be, what Boots is there for. They are there to sell products to customers provided those customers meet the medical requirements of the product, and that should be the extent of Boots involvement.
People have sex. Many women aren't on permanent contraception for various reasons, some medical, and people understandably end up having unplanned sex. I would suggest those that then seek medical help to obtain contraception the next day ARE being responsible and should not be punished for it.
Why should it be free, though? Its not an emergency medical situation.In my opinion it's the same as putting the cost of a 'quit smoking kit' at £300 and telling people it's because they think you shouldn't be smoking in the first place.
That isn't, and shouldn't be, what Boots is there for. They are there to sell products to customers provided those customers meet the medical requirements of the product, and that should be the extent of Boots involvement.
People have sex. Many women aren't on permanent contraception for various reasons, some medical, and people understandably end up having unplanned sex. I would suggest those that then seek medical help to obtain contraception the next day ARE being responsible and should not be punished for it.
Tampax etc aren't free. There is NO EXCUSE for unprotected sex.
I did not suggest it should be free, or even cheap. The vendor can charge what they like for it, but the price shouldn't be motivated by their own morals.
They are a pharmacy, and they should be impartial to such things.
As for unprotected sex, I don't know about you, but I don't walk round with a packet of condoms in my pocket, and I don't know any ladies that do, yet on numerous occasions in my life I have found myself in a situation where the unexpected opportunity for sex has arisen and I have willingly taken it. I wouldn't have thought that was particularly unusual.
Lord Marylebone said:
As for unprotected sex, I don't know about you, but I don't walk round with a packet of condoms in my pocket, and I don't know any ladies that do, yet on numerous occasions in my life I have found myself in a situation where the unexpected opportunity for sex has arisen and I have willingly taken it. I wouldn't have thought that was particularly unusual.
Might not be unusual, but it is foolhardy, verging on idiotic.xjay1337 said:
Lord Marylebone said:
So you are happy with high street stores declaring themselves the moral arbiters of society, and deciding what women should or shouldn't be doing?
In my opinion it's the same as putting the cost of a 'quit smoking kit' at £300 and telling people it's because they think you shouldn't be smoking in the first place.
That isn't, and shouldn't be, what Boots is there for. They are there to sell products to customers provided those customers meet the medical requirements of the product, and that should be the extent of Boots involvement.
People have sex. Many women aren't on permanent contraception for various reasons, some medical, and people understandably end up having unplanned sex. I would suggest those that then seek medical help to obtain contraception the next day ARE being responsible and should not be punished for it.
Why should it be free, though? Its not an emergency medical situation.In my opinion it's the same as putting the cost of a 'quit smoking kit' at £300 and telling people it's because they think you shouldn't be smoking in the first place.
That isn't, and shouldn't be, what Boots is there for. They are there to sell products to customers provided those customers meet the medical requirements of the product, and that should be the extent of Boots involvement.
People have sex. Many women aren't on permanent contraception for various reasons, some medical, and people understandably end up having unplanned sex. I would suggest those that then seek medical help to obtain contraception the next day ARE being responsible and should not be punished for it.
Tampax etc aren't free. There is NO EXCUSE for unprotected sex.
xjay1337 said:
Lord Marylebone said:
So you are happy with high street stores declaring themselves the moral arbiters of society, and deciding what women should or shouldn't be doing?
In my opinion it's the same as putting the cost of a 'quit smoking kit' at £300 and telling people it's because they think you shouldn't be smoking in the first place.
That isn't, and shouldn't be, what Boots is there for. They are there to sell products to customers provided those customers meet the medical requirements of the product, and that should be the extent of Boots involvement.
People have sex. Many women aren't on permanent contraception for various reasons, some medical, and people understandably end up having unplanned sex. I would suggest those that then seek medical help to obtain contraception the next day ARE being responsible and should not be punished for it.
Why should it be free, though? Its not an emergency medical situation.In my opinion it's the same as putting the cost of a 'quit smoking kit' at £300 and telling people it's because they think you shouldn't be smoking in the first place.
That isn't, and shouldn't be, what Boots is there for. They are there to sell products to customers provided those customers meet the medical requirements of the product, and that should be the extent of Boots involvement.
People have sex. Many women aren't on permanent contraception for various reasons, some medical, and people understandably end up having unplanned sex. I would suggest those that then seek medical help to obtain contraception the next day ARE being responsible and should not be punished for it.
Tampax etc aren't free. There is NO EXCUSE for unprotected sex.
The thing with the Moral Arbitrators of course is that they are the same w
kers who moan about single moms and the cost of supporting their children.Edited by babatunde on Monday 24th July 23:37
Lord Marylebone said:
I did not suggest it should be free, or even cheap. The vendor can charge what they like for it, but the price shouldn't be motivated by their own morals.
They are a pharmacy, and they should be impartial to such things.
.
Why?They are a pharmacy, and they should be impartial to such things.
.
What about the Coop ethical banking
What about Chic-fil-A closing on Sunday for religious reasons
Marriott hotels don't have porn on TV as they were founded by a Mormon
And what about Muslim butchers not serving pork
Again someone elses ethical/religious views being imposed on the rest of us.
babatunde said:
If you had actually ever had sex you would know that condoms sometimes tear or come off and believe it or not all sex is planned.
Ahhh, you're grown up. It is the school holidays after all.Edited by babatunde on Monday 24th July 23:37
For 6 months before my partner went on the pill and never once did a condom tear or come off.
It happened once (before with an ex), but that was user error (smashed her with a floppy).
I'm not saying it can't happen, I'm just saying if you're not an idiot then you won't have a problem MOST of the time.
While sex is not often "planned" as in "We'll go shopping at 7:30, have dinner at 8:30, have sex at 10:15...." I can't remember the last time I shagged someone in a bush whilst walking to the shops. Most of the time you go back to someone's house and take their pants off. Stop imagining stupid scenarios to fit your own argument.
Lord Marylebone said:
It shouldn't be free.
I did not suggest it should be free, or even cheap. The vendor can charge what they like for it, but the price shouldn't be motivated by their own morals.
They are a pharmacy, and they should be impartial to such things.
As for unprotected sex, I don't know about you, but I don't walk round with a packet of condoms in my pocket, and I don't know any ladies that do, yet on numerous occasions in my life I have found myself in a situation where the unexpected opportunity for sex has arisen and I have willingly taken it. I wouldn't have thought that was particularly unusual.
I am not a player, but unless I'm in a serious relationship I always kept a condom in my wallet "just in case" (happy to admit I never got a chance to use it). As per my point above it's not often you randomly bump into a stranger and fall into a bush to bang.I did not suggest it should be free, or even cheap. The vendor can charge what they like for it, but the price shouldn't be motivated by their own morals.
They are a pharmacy, and they should be impartial to such things.
As for unprotected sex, I don't know about you, but I don't walk round with a packet of condoms in my pocket, and I don't know any ladies that do, yet on numerous occasions in my life I have found myself in a situation where the unexpected opportunity for sex has arisen and I have willingly taken it. I wouldn't have thought that was particularly unusual.
What I'm saying is don't have unprotected sex and then complain you have to pay £20 to access a morning after pill. If a company wants to make money out of someone's stupid decisions then I'm all for it. It's cheaper than a baby, anyway!
If you can't afford £20 for a morning after pill, then a normal contraceptive pill is £8.50 or so for 3/6 months, Condoms are £10 for a packet of 30, plus come in funny colours and textures, contraceptive implants often have minimal side effects and are free on the NHS. Another thing that is free is keeping your bloody legs closed.
I haven't looked but I imagine the MAP would be available in NHS Pharmacy on prescription for the same £8.50 ... so what is the problem?
edited - tidied up some typos.
Edited by xjay1337 on Tuesday 25th July 12:04
voyds9 said:
Lord Marylebone said:
I did not suggest it should be free, or even cheap. The vendor can charge what they like for it, but the price shouldn't be motivated by their own morals.
They are a pharmacy, and they should be impartial to such things.
.
Why?They are a pharmacy, and they should be impartial to such things.
.
What about the Coop ethical banking
What about Chic-fil-A closing on Sunday for religious reasons
Marriott hotels don't have porn on TV as they were founded by a Mormon
And what about Muslim butchers not serving pork
Again someone elses ethical/religious views being imposed on the rest of us.
Mr2Mike said:
cookie118 said:
Go on then what is acting appropriately?
Having the responsibility to use contraception, I thought that was pretty obvious?You say that the number of abortions means that women aren't acting appropriately.
They could all be because:
Men don't know how to use condoms and they break/come off
They were raped or 'ghosted'
The condom didn't work
Their hormonal contraception didn't work.
How is that related to acting 'appropriately'.
esxste said:
Nothing like a bunch of blokes all putting their 2p worth in about an issue that they will never face in life.
Are you saying we're all virgins? It's a good insult. Exceedingly juvenile. Perhaps its finest example is in The Young Ones when Viv is taunting Rick.If you were seriously suggesting the availability of the MAP is only a problem for women, then you surely recognise that men aren't exactly a disinterested party in a pregnancy?
ATG said:
Are you saying we're all virgins? It's a good insult. Exceedingly juvenile. Perhaps its finest example is in The Young Ones when Viv is taunting Rick.
If you were seriously suggesting the availability of the MAP is only a problem for women, then you surely recognise that men aren't exactly a disinterested party in a pregnancy?
No. I'm saying that men will never need to take the Morning After Pill. If you were seriously suggesting the availability of the MAP is only a problem for women, then you surely recognise that men aren't exactly a disinterested party in a pregnancy?
The closest any man will come to experiencing anything like it is if they ever need to take PEP after some risky sex.
esxste said:
ATG said:
Are you saying we're all virgins? It's a good insult. Exceedingly juvenile. Perhaps its finest example is in The Young Ones when Viv is taunting Rick.
If you were seriously suggesting the availability of the MAP is only a problem for women, then you surely recognise that men aren't exactly a disinterested party in a pregnancy?
No. I'm saying that men will never need to take the Morning After Pill. If you were seriously suggesting the availability of the MAP is only a problem for women, then you surely recognise that men aren't exactly a disinterested party in a pregnancy?
The closest any man will come to experiencing anything like it is if they ever need to take PEP after some risky sex.
cookie118 said:
Not really
You say that the number of abortions means that women aren't acting appropriately.
They could all be because:
Men don't know how to use condoms and they break/come off
They were raped or 'ghosted'
The condom didn't work
Their hormonal contraception didn't work.
How is that related to acting 'appropriately'.
Yes it could be. Are you suggesting the majority of those 180,000 were either raped or did take precautions but they failed? Somewhat unlikely, no?You say that the number of abortions means that women aren't acting appropriately.
They could all be because:
Men don't know how to use condoms and they break/come off
They were raped or 'ghosted'
The condom didn't work
Their hormonal contraception didn't work.
How is that related to acting 'appropriately'.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff