Hacker News Reader

Comment by pyre | Hacker News Reader

While I agree with you in general, a couple of points:

  > that by presumably imitating acts seen in pornography (I don't
  > know, I'm clutching at straws to parse her comment) that
  > she's somehow reducing that capital?

I don't think that she's talking about reduction of capital when she's talking about losses. She's more likely referring to the downsides of imitating porn acts (e.g. vaginal penetration immediately after anal penetration, which could result in a vaginal -- or urinary tract -- infection).

  > And the legal system (and society in general) imposes
  > much more rigorous consequences on men than on women.

Depends on which legal system/society.

View on HN

As a woman myself I am pretty sure she is talking more about the possibility of getting pregnant.

Certainly in the west, I think there's a world of difference between now and say 10-15 years ago. Within that timeframe of porn ubiquity (although I'm implying correlation not causation here) there's been massive changes in womens' rights and dealing with deadbeat dads, to the point where women can put themselves in a bad situation by getting pregnant, but can also put men in a bad situation too.

At the same time the rights of men have not changed with this, and in many legal systems there's an imbalance (e.g. the father has to make payments but does not have the same rights of access, that there are female DV shelters, but there's nothing I'm aware of in the UK for male DV victims, which is more common than you think).

I'm not saying this applies to all people in all cases, but just as the biological skew against women exist, there's a counter skew on the legal and societal side against men (for various values of $legal_system and $society).

I don't think it needs to have anything to do with deadbeat dads or the possibility of raising a child alone. Pregnancy is and will always be different for the woman. For one, she has to actually be pregnant for nine months and deal with the sickness and pains that brings. Then she actually has to give birth. Getting pregnant when you are not ready is a terrifying and a loss of your life and plans as you know them. Yes, when you have the baby you adjust and are happy for it and yes in the future you can pick up your career again and try to juggle both. But when you are not wanting a kid yet, it's hard to think about it that way. And abortion is not exactly an enjoyable alternative either.

I should add also though that if she does mean pregnancy, she is wrong. I would say AIDS pretty much leveled the playing field as far as sexual risk goes. Definitely scarier than giving birth.

I'm also a woman and like iuguy (above) had difficulty figuring out what she meant. My best guess: By 'spending down capital', I think she means that if sex is used as a weapon, then every time you put out, you lose some of your power because the power you have comes from withholding rather than from satisfying -- which is a pretty grim view of the whole situation but I have known at least a couple of women who did apparently withhold sex in their marriage, which is partly what I am basing this inference on.

I did think she meant pregnancy and the myriad consequences tied to it when she talked about women being at a disadvantage to begin with and at risk of greater loss.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com