The war on men who know what’s best for women

Peter Jackson
Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

“First of all, from what I understand from doctors, (pregnancy from rape) is really rare. If it’s a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut that whole thing down.”

— Missouri Republican Senate candidate Todd Akin, Aug. 19

Three cheers for U.S. senatorial candidate Todd Akin for finally unveiling some little-known facts about the female body.

He is absolutely right, of course. A woman’s body knows when something is not right. When unwanted intercourse is detected, the pleasure sensors immediately disengage, the cervix puts up a sort of deflector shield and the egg is protected. It’s all very technical, but that’s basically how it works.

It’s important to distinguish, of course, between legitimate rape and false rape. The latter occurs when a woman says no but really means yes. It’s simple, really. If a woman gets pregnant, the rape is not legitimate.

Of course, the best way to avoid unwanted pregnancy is for the woman to stand up as she’s being raped. As everyone knows, it’s impossible to get pregnant when the woman is standing. Or when she’s a virgin — no one gets pregnant the first time around.

It’s unfortunate that “women’s groups” and “sexual health advocates” and “doctors” are spreading malicious falsehoods about the ins and outs of sex and pregnancy.

Take the Girl Guides and Girl Scouts. Indiana lawmaker Bob Morris has finally lifted the veil on these radical groups. They’ve been infiltrated by Planned Parenthood, and are trying to sexualize young girls and turn them into lesbians.

Broadcaster Rush Limbaugh put it best: “Feminism has led women astray. I love women. I don’t know how this all got started. I love the women’s movement, especially when walking behind it.”

It is high time someone got the straight facts out there.

Fact: a woman can avoid pregnancy by showering or bathing immediately after sex. This seems so obvious, yet thousands of women become pregnant every year by skipping this simple act of hygiene. (Note: they should never bathe in the same tub a man has used within the past 24 hours.)

Fact: a woman who’s breastfeeding cannot get pregnant. That’s because God wants to make sure she doesn’t have babies too close together. Similarly, a woman cannot get pregnant while she’s menstruating.

Fact: a woman can avoid getting pregnant after sex by jumping up and down, or by coughing or sneezing. This dislodges the sperm from the egg. No need for explanation here.

Girls are being led astray by so-called sex education in our schools. It’s like giving kids a how-to manual on being a sex maniac. No wonder there are so many teenage pregnancies. Kids are getting the wrong message.

It’s not up to parents and teachers to discuss sex with children. That’s indecent. Down through history, humans have learned about sex the usual way — in the backseat of a Chevy.

That’s where you learn, for example, why it’s unhealthy for a boy with an erection not to have sex. It could lead to serious complications. Girls, on the other hand, should know that they will prematurely lose their virginity if they use tampons.

Women’s health is too important to be left in the hands of women. Women are too emotionally unstable to deal with the most important facets of the female condition.

What’s needed is a qualified commission of inquiry to examine these delicate topics and afford them the depth of study they deserve. Only the most prominent businessmen, politicians, clergy and Bible scholars should be considered for this important work.

Women deserve no less.

Peter Jackson is The Telegram’s commentary editor.

None of the “facts” presented here are true. Email:

Geographic location: U.S., Indiana

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • Colin Burke
    August 25, 2012 - 08:22

    Mr. Smith, do you really mean to say that anything legal cannot be unjust? What about the legality, which persisted in Canada for many years, of punishing abortionists? You ask who tries to justify killing a child, so I suppose you mean that the creature in its human mother's womb is not yet a child. But that is what the Criminal Code calls him or her, so if the law is always right, then abortion is the killing of a child. You yourself give me the impression that you feel a rape which is "corrected" by abortion cannot be as bad as a rape prolonged by pregnancy. But I don't think that any woman during the act of violation takes much comfort in leisured reflection on the availability of abortion. Calling an opinion "preposterous" is not a reasoned rebuttal; if anything, it suggests that you do not quite grasp the thinking behind it; what you do not understand well enough to show why it must be nonsensical you cannot well refute; only people who share your lack of comprehension can be certain then to agree with you in rejecting the opinion you dislike.

  • Doug Smith
    August 24, 2012 - 15:53

    Mr. Burke, calm down, some of your statements have now become outlandish and nonsensical. To claim that some people, “… almost give one the impression that they approve of rape as providing (initial) justification for killing a child.” Please identify the kind of people that approve of rape. I don’t know of any except the perpetrators. Who on earth is trying to justify killing a child? You call abortion an injustice. Abortion is legal here in Canada, it is not an injustice. Mr. Burke, your statement that female victims of rape might, “… exercise their right to choose and keep a cruel and violent man from compelling them to have an abortion” , is preposterous. It is like saying Hitler was a positive force in the world and we couldn’t have done without him. He did end unemployment in Germany, even created youth groups for children, was the biggest reason for the end of the depression in the United States and was the key impetus for women joining the workforce. All good things no doubt but the pain, deaths, suffering and evil on a gigantic scale that Hitler was responsible for mean we could have done without him . Doug Smith Grand Falls-Windsor

  • Colin Burke
    August 24, 2012 - 13:35

    Mr. Smith, you berate me for lacking compassion for women, but at least my sympathy is sufficient for me to prefer that they not be raped in the first place, perhaps unlike some who almost give one an impression that they approve of rape as providing (initial) justification for killing a child. Of course, after abortion is initially "justified," a woman's reasons for committing it indeed become irrelevant because once we endorse an injustice for any reason we do come to feel that any other reasons are just as good. It does no good to deem some reasons better than others when none of them justify injustice in the first place.

  • Herb Morrison
    August 24, 2012 - 13:00

    Our God-given ability to reason is one quality which separates us from lower animals. However, it is our God-given ability to empathize, to put ourselves in the shoes of others, sometimes in spite of ourselves, to feel their pain, in this particular context, the shoes and pain of a woman who is struggling with the reality of an unwanted pregnancy, which not only places humans a cut above lower animals, but attests to God's ability to enable humans to rise above our very human tendency to be either judgemental or self-serving when dealing with such issues as abortion

  • Colin Burke
    August 24, 2012 - 09:52

    Mr. Smith, I think you have answered the question I had implied: you deem having children is not a good thing in itself but rather its being good or bad depends on whether one wants it or how one might choose to regard it. I happen to think that some women at least might be strong enough to choose to cherish a child begotten in them by rape: strong enough, that is, to really exercise the "right to choose" and keep a cruel and violent man from compelling them to have an abortion. Or don't you think having an abortion, unlike being pregnant, is a good or bad thing depending on how one regards it? That is, is abortion, unlike being pregnant, always a good thing? There seem to be some who think so.

  • Colin Burke
    August 24, 2012 - 09:16

    Mr. Smith, you are assuming that every pregnancy not actually sought at the time of coition will be an unwanted pregnancy. "Taint necessarily so," and if you think it is necessarily so, please explain why. Usually, I believe, it is not being pregnant that women find unwanted but rather some unfortunate circumstance in which the pregnancy occurs or continues; my point is that being pregnant is not in itself a misfortune: unless it is always a misfortune it could in strict logic be deemed a compensation for being raped. According to your logic, receiving a million dollars from the Catholic Church must always be no more than a brutal reminder of having been sexually abused by a priest, and not compensation for it at all. It depends on the assumption that having children is normally a burden which a normal woman would avoid. Scolding me for believing otherwise does not establish the truth of that assumption. Anyone can scold, but tastes differ and I myself find reasoning more palatable.

  • trollol
    August 23, 2012 - 20:54

    Abortion is god's way of preventing more hitlers

  • Doug Smith
    August 23, 2012 - 18:44

    Mr. Burke, your statement that “… a woman pregnant by rape could regard it as a compensation for, rather than a continuation of, her having been violated.”, is an insult to all clear thinking people, especially women. These comments of yours, show a complete lack of empathy for women who have been raped. Where is the compassion for the victim, who will have a lifetime dealing with the psychological after effects of being violently sexually assaulted resulting in an unwanted pregnancy and all the suffering that entails. To be forced by some man to care for an unplanned, unwanted child, emotionally, physically, and financially for roughly two decades while the victim’s plans and dreams for the future are kicked to the street is unacceptable. As to an objective standard of what is right regarding bringing a child into this world, the following easy to understand sentence states it best. Every child should be a wanted child. Doug Smith, Grand Falls-Windsor

  • Colin Burke
    August 23, 2012 - 10:22

    "You can't decide what is best for someone else." Unfortunately, we can't decide what is best for ourselves, either, since no one is judge in his (or her) own case. We can only judge what must simply be right, according to some general, objective standard, or else abandon thought and simply follow our whims. We must decide according to an objective standard whether an action or a condition is in itself good or bad or by its own nature something to be sought or avoided according to external circumstances. One of the best objective standards for judging human actions is whether the latter follow the principle that persons deserve the effects of what they do. That would suggest that a woman who engages in coition deserves to have a child, unless getting pregnant is not an effect of "having sex." How a woman who was raped ought to regard her being pregnant depends on whether having a child is in itself a good thing, a bad thing, or whether its being good or bad depends on how one thinks of it. If having a child is in itself a good thing, a woman pregnant by rape could regard it as a compensation for, rather than a continuation of, her having been violated. And if she is a really dedicated feminist, she might welcome being able to have a child without being obliged to let the father have any say in her raising that child, who would be in a sense therefore entirely her own.

    • Conrad
      August 23, 2012 - 15:37

      Yeah, ok. Whatever that was all about?

  • Horrified
    August 22, 2012 - 16:19

    When I read Todd Akin's comments last weekend I knew the debate on abortion had hit a new low. I have been following for some time the various attempts by legislators in the US to prohibit women's constitutionally protected right to get an abortion if she chooses..I am horrified and sickened by these government sanctioned attempts to control women through controlling their reproductive autonomy. In all of the arguments I hear about prohibiting abortion, I NEVER hear about the woman, only the fetus and it's right to exist. This holds true in Good Point Todd's comment as well where it suggested that woman can simply have the baby and then give it up for adoption. I can think of no greater insult and injustice than to FORCE a woman who has already been violated and insulted in the worst possible way to endure nine months of an unwanted, unwelcome pregnancy, and then to give birth to the child of the monster that did it. To suggest that carrying the baby and giving it up is a good solution completely removes the woman from the equation - she is irrelevant in this scenario. I must also take issue with the whole idea that abortion is somehow "more acceptable" if the woman has been raped. There are many, many reasons why someone would choose to terminate a pregnancy, and it does no good to deem some reasons "better" than others. The fact is, it's a woman's choice to make, and her reasons are irrelevant. Legally that is the way it is, and if we have to fight to keep it that way, that is a fight worth having.

  • Ashley
    August 22, 2012 - 11:30

    @ good point Todd. Abortion is a touchy subject. and I kind of see your point when you say it's a human rights issue. But really early on its just cells with the potential to become a human. I think you can see my point if your for the day after pill which most people who are pro-life consider to be an abortion just in pill form. Rape is another touchy subject. But to say that pregnancy from rape is rare is like saying getting pregnant while having unprotected sex is rare. It happens alot more than you would think. anyways to get to my main point here. You agree with todd when he says the rapist should be punished for his crime not the child. and you say there are adoption options for the said pregnant victim of rape. But let me ask you this should the rape victim be punished with 9-10 months of pregnancy? should she go through the morning sickness? should she go through having to leave school or work? should she go through the pain of labor? her body then after giving birth will take up to 3 years to fully recover weight gain, damage to her vagina and so on. You can say oh she has to deal with it for 9 months and then adoption is a perfect option she can just forget about it then. But labor and pregnancy isn't just something you forget. also there is the very real possibility of post pardium depression. and then there is a child that is hers even if it was a product of rape. She then has that to think about for the rest of her life. Abortion may seem harsh. but really it's the womans body that has already been violated and invaded to say she should go through pregnancy and labour as a result of her being raped something that was already torture enough is just cruel. Personally I think abortion should be an option for these women.

    • Conrad
      August 22, 2012 - 15:29

      I agree ashley. Bad point Todd you sound ignorant. You can't decide what is best for someone else.

  • Good Point Todd
    August 22, 2012 - 07:41

    The candidate was talking about abortion. Abortion is not a woman's issue. It is a human rights issues as both baby men and baby women are aborted. And the number of abortions because of rape is very low compared to other excuses. But, with the hard cases that pople talk about, others are led to belive that abortion only happens in the case of rape. There are over 100,000 abortions in Canada a year. Please do not tell me that there are 100,000 rape cases a year that result in pregnancy. With factors rape victims on the pill, too old or young to have children, not fertile at the time, "releases" outside the body, and other factors, pregancy from rape is rare. Even if there is, the morning after pill is available. Either way, why punish the innocent child for the sins of the father when adoption is available? Either way, the woman having an abortion is subject to just as many physical complications when it come to abortion. While the candidate's may or may not be vaild, his argument about abortion is. We do not need abortion on demand for *any* reason just because of rape. If we allow it only in the case of rape, maybe we can bring of the rapists to trail as it is a way to expose their crimes.