In a well-known paper, Akerlof, Yellen, and Katz proposed a counter-intuitive explanation for the rise of non-marital births in the United States that emphasized how birth control and abortion weakened the responsibility of men to their unmarried partner's pregnancy. The paper is regularly cited by social conservatives to support measures to restrict sex education and access to contraception and abortion. I argue that this use of the paper's findings stems from specific modeling assumptions about "types" of women. I present a reformulation of the model using more reasonable "types" that generates precisely the same results, but with radically different policy implications.