Oh, that would be stuff like "pregnancy" which a male person has absolutely nothing at all to do with, and "breastfeeding" in sacred male precincts like THE WORKPLACE, UNIVERSITIES, THE MILITARY AND OTHER SACRED MALE DOMAINS WHICH UNDER LAW SHOULD BE FOREVER AND EVER MALE ONLY!
That a female breast should be displayed to suckle an infant is an insult to male eyes which must only see female breasts displayed provocatively for male eyes and to inspire male lust in exclusively male magazines. Any display not meant to please and arouse the male eye is heresy!
Demands for access to workplaces, universities, the military, and other previously male venues (accompanied with equally strident demands to engage there in female-only activities, such as pregnancy and breastfeeding) invite accusations of sexual “harassment” against the men when relations inevitably develop (and often turn sour), regardless of who initiates them.We must return to the sacred and holy patriarchal standards of the 19th century when, if a woman had:
.... Possession of these booklets, which had been judged "obscene and pornographic" by men ... could have gotten her into a world of trouble. Distributing them even more so.From The Serpent's Shadow by Mercedes Lackey.
Even though any man can walk into his club with a copy of The Lustful Turk or Fanny Hill under his arm and no one would so much as blink an eye ... And he can show his Japanese pillow book or illustrated Kama Sutra to select friends over brandy and cigars and be congratulated on his acquisition and refined tastes. But Anna Besant's The Law of Population and Dr. Allisson's Book for Married Women are obscene and cannot be permitted.
And dirty filthy books must be totally banned, outlawed:
A Dirty Filthy Book: The Writings of Charles Knowlton and Annie Besant on Birth Control and Reproductive Physiology and an Account of the Bradlaugh-Besant TrialProfessor Stevie Basketcase has said so and Professor Basketcase speaks for God!
A London jury convicts Annie Besant (right), a leading birth control advocate, and Charles Bradlaugh, a political radical and atheist, of publishing an obscene book.Footnote from the 21st Century: Douching IS NOT reliable contraception. Consult your local Planned Parenthood for the latest and greatest and most reliable contraception.
They had resuscitated an 1832 pamphlet on birth control by Dr. Charles Knowlton, entitled The Fruits of Philosophy; The Private Companion of Young Married Couples. Dr. Knowlton blamed most of society's woes on large families and encouraged douching after intercourse to forestall conception. As opposed to coitus interruptus or the rudimentary condoms of the day, the doctor argued that douching puts the power over conception in the hands of the woman, "where for good reasons it ought to be." Besant and Bradlaugh, who had hoped for the publicity of a prosecution, launched Freethought Publications and hand delivered a copy of the book to the Central Criminal Court.
The Solicitor-General, who handled the lengthy prosecution, denounced it as a "dirty, filthy book [appealing to] strangely perverted minds." On the stand, Besant said douching is the lawful alternative to the impractical (abstinence) and the immoral (abortion). The jury makes an effort to reach a middle ground, finding that the pamphlet is "calculated to deprave public morals" but suggesting that the defendants had no "corrupt motives." The Lord Chief Justice, insisting the jury could not have it both ways, sentences Besant and Bradlaugh to six months in prison. Neither served a day, the sentences were set aside on appeal.