They start this article with pro-life talking points:

When a man and a woman of a certain age have unprotected sex, there is always the possibility a baby will be made. Such are the facts of life with which, one would assume, a doctor is familiar.

Yes indeed.

But read the article. I was bemused reading it, that a grown adult, a physician, would launch a lawsuit for this:

And yet a 42-year-old Toronto physician recently tried to sue a woman with whom he’d had a casual sexual relationship for more than $4 million in damages, claiming “non-pathological emotional harm of an unplanned parenthood.”

…Her own miscarriage. She acknowledges a major point here:

The more I considered it, the more I became convinced that the silence around miscarriage was connected to feminism’s work around abortion. How could I grieve a thing that didn’t exist? If a fetus is not meaningfully alive, if it is just a collection of cells – the cornerstone claim of the pro-choice movement – what does it mean to miscarry one?

…but this appears to never sink into her consciousness. It’s as if that idea is the swimming pool, but she just sits on the edge, never taking a dive in to embrace the reality that if we abort a collection of cells in utero, we cannot mourn the loss of a son or daughter, also in utero.

Oddly, I also think that the abortion culture creates an expectation that we don’t have children when we don’t want to, and we do have children at the precise moment we decide we are ready. Perhaps the result is the kind devastation she experiences at her own miscarriage. It’s as if she blames herself for not being able to sustain the pregnancy, not realizing this was never within her personal sphere of power.

She also only mourns the child she wanted, not the one she aborted. Another inconsistency that the article never grapples with.

Today, “female viagra” was approved by the FDA.

If you want to read about how and why this happened, click here.

Flibanserin, a serotonergic drug, was initially in clinical trials as an antidepressant. Despite its history of being a “thrice failed antidepressant,” Sprout persevered and used the “finding” that some women in the drug trials said they experienced a slight increase in sexual desire as the reason to repackage the drug. Flibanserin was soon in clinical trials for Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD), an indication listed in the previous edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders). Sprout now maintains that HSDD is comparable to the DSM-5’s “Female Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder,” and that women deserve a drug to treat this disorder.

As part of the attempt to gain approval for its drug, Sprout  initiated an ingenious marketing campaign, “Even the Score,” claiming that there was a sexism inherent in the number of FDA-approved treatments for sexual disorders: 26 for men and “zero for women.” However, this claim was false. There are only 8 drugs that treat male sexual dysfunction, and none are FDA-approved for low libido.

However, the “Even the Score” campaign worked. Sprout was able to get women’s groups to sign on to the idea that getting this drug approved was almost akin to getting Title IX passed.

Keep reading. It’s pretty fascinating stuff about the politics of drug approval for conditions that don’t exist, with no proof they do anything over and above a placebo.