Well I think this seems more than fair.

Courtesy of Time: 

A Kentucky lawmaker has introduced a bill that would require men who are seeking erectile dysfunction drugs like Viagra to be married, to get a note of consent from their wives, and to swear on the Bible to remain faithful. 

The legislation, penned by Democratic Rep. Mary Lou Marzian, is a symbolic attempt to prove a point about the government’s role in private medical decisions, she told Reuters on Monday. It has little chance of becoming law. 

It comes after Republican Gov. Matt Bevin signed an informed consent law that requires women to consult with a doctor before having an abortion. 

“My point is to illustrate how intrusive and ridiculous it is for elected officials to be inserting themselves into private and personal medical decisions,” Marzian, 61, told the news agency. “We need to stop it, we need to allow women and men to make their own decisions with their doctor and their family.”

"Swear on the Bible to remain faithful." 

Well we know there is probably not a "family values" politician in the country willing to take that pledge, don't we.

Hey do you remember when I claimed that the Pentagon spent a half million dollars on Viagra? Yeah well I was wrong, it is 41.6 million dollars.

Courtesy of Roll Call:  

Remember this recent story about the Pentagon’s Viagra budget of more than $500,000 last year? The Military Times threw some shade on it with its own reporting, which put the tally at $41.6 million, and $84.2 million on erectile dysfunction drugs overall. 

Then there’s this: 

And since 2011, the tab for drugs like Viagra, Cialis and Levitra totals $294 million — the equivalent of nearly four U.S. Air Force F-35 Joint Strike Fighters.

Okay in my earlier write up there were a few of you who argued that the five hundred thousand was not that bad considering that some of these medications were for elderly veterans.

So now I have to ask, do you feel the same now that it's 41.6 million?

The Pentagon spent more than half a million dollars on Viagra last year. Well gee that's money well spent.

Courtesy of Fox News:  

The Department of Defense (DoD) spent more than a half a million dollars on the male enhancement drug Viagra last year, according to government contracts. 

The Pentagon issued 60 contracts worth$504,816 for the drug in 2014. All 60 contracts were awarded to Cardinal Health Inc., a pharmaceutical distribution company based in Dublin, Ohio. 

Last year DoD also ordered $3,505 worth of Levitra, and $14,540 of Cialis, other popular erectile dysfunction drugs. 

The contracts were filed under "Troop Support."

(Well of course it was.)

DoD began offering Viagra to soldiers as a medical benefit in 1998, when the drug cost $10 a pill. Due to inflation, one pill now costs $25. At the time the military's policy only allowed for six pills a month per patient, and the DoD said they would "not replace lost or stolen pills."

Tricare the military's health care provider also covers  penis pumps, "penile implants and testicular prostheses," and hormone injections to treat Erectile Dysfunction.

Can't have a fighting man who can't get it up now can we?

But then considering how many female military personnel are raped or sexually assaulted each year, perhaps that money would be better spent on sensitivity training rather than on various ways to give men a means with which to carry out those assaults.

I think this pretty much says it all.

The funny thing to me is that these dipshits seem to believe that the message they are sending is "Look how manly I am," when in fact the message we all are receiving is "I am so fucking insecure!"

Seem's fair.

You know somehow I don't think the church, nor the GOP, would get so worked up over fighting medication inspired erections as they do over pregnancies prevented, or terminated, through medication.

Hmm, I wonder why?

Scientists invent female version of Viagra, then consider watering down its effects due to fear that increased female sexuality might result in societal harm.

Courtesy of Seattle Pi:  

Women looking to get their freak back may soon be able to pop a new breed of lust drug: Lybrido. 

But scientists developing the desire pill sometimes called “female Viagra” confided in one writer an unusual worry. They fear the libido-booster may work too well. 

(And the problem with that is …?) 

Journalist Daniel Bergner, whose story on the still-being-developed wonder drug was published last week in the New York Times Magazine, says researchers worry about creating an orgasm-hungry nympho. Yeah, the author expressed surprise at that, too. 

“More than one adviser to the industry told me that companies worried about the prospect that their study results would be too strong, that the F.D.A. would reject an application out of concern that a chemical would lead to female excesses, crazed binges of infidelity, societal splintering,” Bergner writes. 

So drug companies may actually temper the potency of these easy-to-swallow menthol-flavored passion-stimulants, lest these crazy sex-having females have, you know, crazy amounts of sex. Whenever they feel like it, which would, presumably, be way more often.

Okay could somebody remind me if there were any similar concerns expressed about the introduction of Viagra? All I remember is trumpets blowing and everything but a damn ticker tape parade for the drug company that put it on the market.

"Oh my God!" They said, "Now old men can get boners! This is the greatest invention since sliced bread. Which we don't even need anymore because now we can slice it with out boners!"

Look I have been married....a couple of times, and if this product had been available back then I would have gladly bought it in bulk.

It does not make any difference how good you are in the sack, after working all day, making dinner for the family, and then cleaning up the mess left by the kids, a lot of women are just not as ready to rock their spouse's world between the sheets most nights as they were when they started dating. (And before anybody jumps down my throat you should know that I also worked and made dinner, actually more nights than my wife did. Admittedly I was not so good at the cleaning.)

However the fact is that many men, ESPECIALLY conservative men, fear female sexuality and would not know what to do with a sexually aggressive woman if she bit them in the ass. (And after taking this drug she just might do that!)

Well as a progressive male, in relatively good shape, I say "What's good for the gander, is good for the goose. Bring it on!"

"Societal splintering" my ass! The only thing that might get splintered is a few male egos, and I don't see that as necessarily a bad thing.

If I were a woman this would absolutely piss me off! As a man I still find it incredibly unfair.

You know if it were the men who got pregnant there would be drive thru abortion clinics and the morning after pill would come in either bacon or pizza flavor.

Bill Maher asks, "When did we become a nation of dickless armchair warriors?"

Okay that was fairly brutal, but try as I might I could not find any place where he was wrong.

(H/T to Mediaite.)

If men want to dictate to women how, and if, they should use birth control....

You have to admit, it DOES seem only fair.