I propose a ban on sex

..but only for three months a year – every year. I know, enforcing such a ban would be impossible – but if it were a possibility..

When I suggested this on Facebook, the very first response I got was ‘Don’t be hasty’. Now while i’ll admit this was a throwaway comment initially but throwing the idea away completely may actually be the hasty thing.

Let us consider this..

My initial dea was to ban sex in the months September, October and November so as to avoid the result of another poor child doomed to sit an academic exam on his or her birthday like i have practically every year I’ve been a student – but I was thinking small, there are far more reasons why this is a good idea!

May, June and July are not only exam times, they are perfect holiday times – they are also (usually) hot and being in late stage pregnancy in hot weather is no fun at all, I know this from experience!

So banning sex 9 months previously immediately removes that possibility.

It would enable the maternity services to organise their departments and train their staff while allowing a decent holiday rotation as there would be a three month cessation on the actual delivery front (obviously pre-natal care, emergency and premature deliveries would need to be catered for) it also means there would definitely be time to show prospective parents around the wards and answer any questions in full.

It removes the stress/competition aspect, if you know there is no hope of sex after a date then you can relax and just be yourself instead of having that at the back of your mind – and if you like the person then waiting 3 months will just heighten the anticipation and improve the sex when it happens (theoretically)

..It also gives you three months in a year to concentrate on building and mending relationships without sex muddying the waters – something that would work wonders for the Kelly, Terry and Tigers of this world.

Ok, so there are holes in all of this – August and September are fairly hot these days as well; but we could remedy that hole by adding an extra month or so to the ban – perhaps even radically add to the initial suggestion by banning sex for 6 months a year..

We could then plan our population and healthcare services a lot more efficiently as those resources could be shared across departments – I’m sure there are some patients for whom an hour in a birthing pool would do wonders, not to mention the extra beds/ ward availability.

I know that we’d probably have an explosion of births during the other 6 months but the previous 6 would have prepared for that – and there’s likely to be a reduction overall in birth rate if we can only procreate for half of the usual time.

Which would result in more resources saved for the planet! Less landfill, less energy waste = Win!

It’s an idea worth thinking about – but I know every single man on the planet would vote against the adoption of such a scheme and a least a third of the women would agree so.. *sigh* once again my brilliance is condemned to the scrapheap.

..But it’s good to dream of a better world isn’t it? just a shame none of us will ever agree on how to create it.

(Now, feel free to leave your scorn and hole pokery in the comments – I’m already expecting an onrush of spam after the numerous usage of the word sex in this post.)

3 thoughts on “I propose a ban on sex

  1. Jlex Aamie

    I don’t know, I can see the benefits of this proposal. You have to consider though that some of the benefits mentioned could be achieved with a much less radical idea such as contraception. Also, as you mentioned policing such an idea would be almost inconceivable especially considering that we can’t even manage to get the basics of a law-abiding society working correctly. Consider also the penalty of breaking such a law? You can’t put somebody in prison for having sex at the wrong time of year, we barely have enough prisons for murderers and rapists let alone pro-creators! So the suggested penalty for out-of-season sexual contact would likely be a hefty fine? This raises discriminator issues; take Tiger Woods as an example, being that he has already been mentioned in this post. A fixed penalty fine for having sex is unlikely to be a deterrent for the Tiger Woods of the world, which means that you are effectively saying if you are a poor or working class person you are not entitled to have sex for certain months of the year. This is unlikely to be popular with such classes, is it ? I could probably think of tons of other stuff to say about this post but I have to end it at some point 😉

  2. Wendy Burnett

    I love it . . . Of course, you’re right, no man in the world would ever agree. Maybe if it was one week a month without sex? That’s much more doable, and would still have all the benefits (except nobody being in the last trimester during the hot weather,) just spread out over the year rather than concentrated in the summer.

Comments are closed.