Kansas City Chiefs Sons Of America Chiefs Chapter Signatures shirt

In her taut, 143-page manifesto, Blair lays out 28 potent, plainspoken supporting arguments calling for greater male responsibility. She begins with simple biology—the Kansas City Chiefs Sons Of America Chiefs Chapter Signatures shirt in other words I will buy this fact that “men are 50 times more fertile than women”—making it nonsensical to place “the burden of pregnancy prevention on the person who is fertile for 24 hours a month, instead of the person who is fertile 24 hours a day, every day of their life.” The author, a pro-choice Mormon mother of six, goes on to contrast the difficulty in accessing and using female contraception (from the pill to the patch, IUDs, and others) with the fact that male birth control—chiefly condoms and vasectomies—is “easier, cheaper, more convenient, safer, and more effective than birth control options for women.” Yet as argument number nine posits, socially and culturally “we expect women to do the work of pregnancy prevention.” (Blair issues the disclaimer that she does not use inclusive language in the book, calling it “a cisgender heterosexual argument for people engaging in cisgender sexual relationships.”)

Kansas City Chiefs Sons Of America Chiefs Chapter Signatures shirt, hoodie, tank top, sweater and long sleeve t-shirt

Memes, tweets, and signs decried this point in post-Roe protests: “Don’t like abortion? Get a vasectomy!” But while those felt, at times, like little more than clever retorts, Blair offers a tactical, full-throated cry for men to step up and make condoms ubiquitous and vasectomies (her husband had one) more common. Currently, she writes, only 9% of men get vasectomies, despite the Kansas City Chiefs Sons Of America Chiefs Chapter Signatures shirt in other words I will buy this fact that they are less invasive than tubal ligation (or getting one’s tubes tied). Which brings Blair to argument number 10: “We don’t mind if women suffer as long as it makes things easier for men.”Ejaculate Responsibly alternately provokes dawning recognition (many points feel like they’ve been hiding in plain sight) and simmering rage. It isn’t women’s sexual freedom that should be considered incendiary, I considered after reading number 24, but men’s sperm. “Sperm should be considered a dangerous bodily fluid that can cause pain, a lifetime of disruption, and even death for some,” Blair writes. “Sperm can create a person. Sperm can kill a person.” By way of solutions, she points to a discourse shift, promoting condoms the way seat belts once were; “thorough sex ed”; free, accessible birth control; and calling on politicians to focus on men too, asking them, “What is your plan for preventing irresponsible ejaculations?”