Do we think that assumption of risk equal consent? For example, Sarah Palin agreed to have amniocentesis before giving birth to her fifth child, even though it involved assuming a risk of triggering a miscarriage. If the miscarriage had occurred, would we say that she had consented to it? Similarly, a guy who is mugged while walking through a crime-infested neighborhood to work will probably not be accused of “consenting” to the mugging.

Law professor Sherry F. Colb argues that people’s willingness to make judgments about consent is heavily bound up with our judgments about the merits of the underlying risky activity. Thus, a person who goes bankrupt after trying to build a restaurant is regarded differently than a person who goes bankrupt at the casino – even though the odds of success may well have been the same.

Then Anna Quindlen wrote a column about it and then National Review posted some chain symposium statements to try to debunk it.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZjkwNWQ4ZDQ2NTljNDg4MjUyYWIxZWQ0NDVjMTkxYjg=

The equivocation gets boring after a while.

With this, I’m in perfect agreement, serena. I’ve got nothing against teenage individuals having sexual relations. But I’ve got a real beef with “teen sex”. I think you’ll find that most liberal-minded people such as myself will agree with conservatives on this. Hell, from my experience, even most teens will be on board.

The problem is, most attempts to attack this problem always end up doing a lot of collateral damage to the private, autonomous lives of adults - and not always by coincidence. To target kids specifically, we’ll have to drastically change the way our schools are run, and that includes getting rid of a lot of the cute little John Hughes mythologies we have about it.

I advocate a much harder tack on bullying - if girls fear getting socially ostracized, would-be social ostracizers simply have to have someone else to fear more. It is noteworthy that American schools are much more rigidly hierarchical in their social pecking order than schools in Europe. Not surprisingly, America has a greater problem with teen sex and school shootings.

This being an either/or, I presume.

“This results in almost sex slavery, a level of pressure to be ALWAYS sexual, NEVER maternal, NEVER just out of season at the time, NEVER morally concerned, NEVER spiritually concerned, that destroys women inside.”

Ehh. Men have been pressuring women for more sex since our mammoth hunting days. Women have been and continue to be as maternal, morally concerned, and spiritually concerned as ever - even those who do the grown up once in a while.

The reason I think this is that the view of feminism you claim is man-hating — which itself is odd, but this particular view is man-hating in an extremely simplistic, battle of the sexes, WOMENZ MUST WANT TO TAKE OVER way. It also treats the sole battleground of the battle of the sexes as women’s bodies, considering forced pregnancy to be an acceptable pawn to sacrifice in the greater good of some bizarre chess move that in this distorted vision (which is not real) would advance womankind above menkind.

I think you are a pro-life troll trying to concoct reasoning you think will be persuasive to feminists, while completely misunderstanding the concepts of reproductive rights and feminism.

Right. That’s what the men with guns are FOR–to make you care.

And yes, I had to deal with nosey ass people today who are under the delusion that I give a shit about them, their opinions or their beliefs.

And I’m sorry, but selfish? Pffft. So what?

You think its wrong? Sucks for you then huh.

Maybe it’s just me, but I’m not inclined to listen to anti abortion arguements from people who have yet to establish why I should give a damn about their opinion in the first place.

Sounds like a pretty straightforward, if roughly worded, libertarian argument.

That’s why we have laws (and argue about what they should be); to determine whose opinions get backed up by men with guns, and whose opinions don’t.