Midweek Media: Only Abstinence Can Prevent Drowning

Share on Tumblr

Trigger warning: the graphic below refers in parody to recent events, including Representative Todd Akin, Republican from Missouri, who recently made certain indefensible claims about rape not causing pregnancy. Following links in this article may lead to other articles that discuss these topics, and this one discusses them obliquely.

If you haven’t been following the recent upwelling of hatred defending itself with complete ignorance and masquerading as religious concern for life, start here.

We Should Ban Life Jackets & Other Flotation Devices

The picture shows a young boy with a life jacket on standing on a dock holding an oar with a canoe pulled up beside him. The text in the graphic is below for those who can’t read it:

WE SHOULD BAN LIFE JACKETS & OTHER FLOTATION DEVICES

THEY ONLY ENCOURAGE RISKY BEHAVIOR. THE ONLY 100% EFFECTIVE WAY TO PREVENT DROWNING IS TOTAL ABSTINENCE FROM GOING IN THE WATER.

and if you do, by chance, find yourself struggling with drowning, then no life-saving otherwise procedure or act should be allowed to be administered. you got yourself into this mess, you have to live with the consequences.

YOU SHOULD SEE DROWNING AS A GIFT.

ALSO IF YOU WERE FORCIBLY PUSHED INTO THE WATER, DON’T WORRY. IF IT WAS A LEGITIMATE PUSHING, YOUR BODY WILL FIND A WAY TO SHUT OUT ALL THE WATER AND SURVIVE THE DROWNING.

original source: http//breanieswordvomit.tumblr.com/

Comments

  1. Red says

    There are those who would argue that learning to swim is a necessity and can save your life.

    Well, learning safe sex is (or SHOULD) ALSO a necessity and can save your life.

    Further on, while it’s true that sex isn’t necessary in order to live, we can’t stop people from having sex anymore than we can stop people from swimming. People who know how to swim are far less likely to drown. Those who don’t know how to swim take a tremendous risk when they go out into the water. So how can anyone demand that those who engage in unprotected sexual acts be ‘made to live with the consequences’ when NO ONE would teach them how? What are the chances they would if they knew all the risks involved and took steps to protect themselves?

  2. says

    Red, I don’t believe the people who make these arguments mistakenly think they’re logical and sound. I think they make them for entirely self-serving purposes: to harm the competition.

    Consider another popular right-wing argument: “poor and don’t like it? Then work your ass off and pull yourself up by your own bootstraps! Don’t have boots? Oh, that’s just mumble mumble shut up.” They know what they’re advising is impossible for all but a fraction of a percent of poor people, but then the last thing they want is for people to move up from poverty, because then those former poor people become competition.

    If women aren’t being held back by rape culture and forced pregnancy, what viable competitors we’ll become. If blacks aren’t afraid of being shot for “being in the wrong place at the wrong time” AND having their murderers celebrated for it, what viable competitors they’ll become. If gays are allowed to engage in marriage, then what a viable competitive alternative model of marriage we’ll have.

    That, IMO, is what it’s all about. They don’t really think they’re addressing your problems with this advice. The LAST thing they want is for you not to HAVE these problems, because then you’ll be better competition, and oh dear… they might find out they’re not such great competition themselves.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail. You can also subscribe without commenting.