Sweet deity in a bicycle basket! It's not like I regularly turn to Dear Abby for advice on my oh-so-post-modern existence (can't even REMEMBER the last time she discussed how hard it is to hold up a 1200-page Ayn Rand on a crowded Metro) but I couldn't believe the idiocy she's spewing today.

DEAR ABBY: My boyfriend and I have been living together for a year. We split all the bills -- rent, utilities, etc. -- in half.

A few nights ago I asked him how he felt about paying for half my birth control pills, which amounts to $40 a month. Because neither of us is ready for children, I think we should share the expense.

Am I out of line to ask my boyfriend to split the cost with me? This has become a hot topic at work. The guys don't agree with me, and surprisingly, most of the women don't, either. What is your take on this? -- ALL IN LOVE IS FAIR

Abby responds that it's HER expense, not theirs: "As I see it, there are two kinds of expenses when people share a dwelling: joint expenses and those that are personal. Prescription drugs usually fall into the latter category." So is it only her "personal" expense when she starts spewing out bebehs that need dydies, milks and college educations because he's too cheap to pony up for a couple of Trojans?

Abby also suggests that if a man needs Viagra, it's his expense and not the woman's. Now, I don't necessarily agree with that either, except that it's been more than obvious for a very long time that women still make less than men for doing the very same job. But why is Viagra always the obvious counterpart for birth control pills? I would argue that Viagra is (well, somewhat) necessary, but not compared with a pill or other method that would prevent the average woman from becoming pregnant 10-15 times in her life.

Psst: