About 12 years ago, I was stunned when I heard my mother-in-law describe meeting my father-in-law as, "We met in college, and before I knew it, I was pregnant." In the context of the conversation and based on her tone of voice, it sounded as if pregnancy was saying it just happened to her, like catching a cold, or a rock falling on her house, or as if she didn't understand that unprotected sex could lead to pregnancy.

That led me to ask my now wife if her mom had been raped, since I just couldn't understand using such passive language to talk about the foreseesble result of an act that she had actively participated in. I was also worried about her mother. Fortunately, my wife clarified that her mom had not been raped. I then told my wife why I had those doubts, and she understood it.

At first, I attributed this language to her being a somewhat socially conservative Latin American woman born in the 1950s. Since the time, however, I've noticed just how common such language is even in much more sexually liberal circles. Even ostensibly progressive people who use terms like "enthusiastic consent" and condemn slut shaming against women who take their sexual pleasure into their own hands will use language like "he got her pregnant" or "he fucked her," rather than "they had sex" or "they fucked each other." They frame sex entirely as something that a man does to a woman, rather than something that they do together. This is important, because this framing is used to justify not giving men reproductive rights, arguing that he is therefore fully responsible for the result of sex (despite his complete lack of power to determine what happens thereafter).

It's weird, because in any other context, most ostensibly progressive and feminist-leaning people of both sexes would decry the idea of sex as something that a man does to a woman rather than an activity that they enjoy together. They would say that this attitude is sex-negative and patriarchal, as well as objectifying and helping to promote a rape culture. Yet, when it comes to pregnancy and reproductive rights, many of the same people suddenly are happy to fall back on the traditional notion of women as passive objects of men's lust in the act of sexual intercourse.

I think nearly all of us here can understand why this is problematic and inconsistent. So let's discuss...