- Joined
- Oct 22, 2002
- Messages
- 38,793
- Location
- Frozen in Michigan
- Gender
- Old Fart
- Basic Beliefs
- Don't be a dick.
No, not just that, but the voluntary actions that lead to an egg and sperm fusing. That is, penis-in-vagina sex.If one of the people you are referring to is me, I'm baffled as to why you feel that way. I've said men and women are equally responsible (biologically and morally) for pregnancy.Honestly, I'm still baffled by why two gay guys seem to be so offended at women wanting men to take more responsibility for preventing pregnancies.
Okay, let me try this again.
You say "men and women are equally responsible for pregnancy"
You support this with reference to pregnancy requiring both an egg and a sperm
They should have equal responsibility. I don't know how you judge the level of responsibility now, though. Are you basing it off your own experience? Survey responses? Your perception of general attitudes?Toni and I say "women are considered way more responsible for preventing pregnancy than men"
And we make the argument that because men have a very large degree of control over when they ejaculate, and because the means of preventing pregnancy are very, very easy for men to employ in multiple ways, men should have more responsibility for preventing pregnancy than they do now.
Responsibility for pregnancy is the other side of the same coin as 'responsibility for preventing pregnancy'.So, first off, do you get that you're talking about something different than what Toni and I are talking about?
You are talking about responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
You are talking about men and women having equal biological responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about men and women having very unequal social responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
Instead of referring to my question as illogical, which could have led to a substantive and productive discussion of whether Toni's logic necessarily implied that, you chose to ask your stupid strawman beat-your-wife question about what you say I think the necessary result from "men start pregnancies" is, and left the question I actually asked Toni completely out of it. So here we are. The poor choice you made, about how to deal with your opinion that Toni’s logic does not necessarily imply that, is all on you.The only person exhibiting poor reading skills is you. You made the claim “according to your logic men should get to define how pregnancies go”. Toni’s logic does not necessarily imply that. Instead of referring to your question as illogical I asked my question about your question.And I don't think “men get to define how pregnancies go” is the necessary result from”men start pregnancies”. ... You asked because you have poor reading comprehension. Exactly which part of "So according to your logic, " do you have difficulty understanding that induced you to just pretend that part wasn't there when you attempted to paraphrase my argument so carelessly?
On what planet does you asking me why I think something I don't think and didn't in any way imply qualify as asking me to show my work? You were simply putting words in my mouth.You are mistaken.Bomb#20 said:You were not asking me to show my work.
But I didn't insinuate anything of the sort -- what I wrote was blatant sarcasm. I was obviously insinuating that you had asked me a "Have you stopped beating your wife?" question and deserved to be paid back in like coin.Insinuating someone thinks it is ok to beat their spouseBomb#20 said:It was not an insulting deflection.
And? I didn't offer an opinion about whether what I said was insulting.is insulting to most people regardless of your intent.
Well why didn't you just say that in the first place if that's what you wanted to talk about?How about showing your work?
I am not interested in hearing your excuses for your misinterpretation and using an insulting response. They were unconvincing and boring the first time.Bomb#20 said:
Bomb#20 said:Toni wrote "I (inadvertently) started this thread and I get to define how I want the conversation to go." She appeared to be implicitly relying on the premise that the person who starts something derives from that act of initiation some special authority to define what subsequently happens to it, along the lines of the Christian trope about potters and pots. So I simply combined that premise with her other oft-repeated premise about who starts pregnancies, and I "did the math.
Small correction: biologically speaking g, it requires a sperm(male) to fertilize an ovum( female) plus the right conditions for the fertilized egg to properly divide and then implant in the uterine lining instead of being expelled or implanting inappropriately elsewhere, plus all of the female parent’s organs and tissues to continue to provide needed nutrition, waste management, etc. for the embryo to gestate until it is a fully developed fetus at 40 weeks gestation, at which point the female parent exerts tremendous effort and energy and experiences tremendous risk while doing so and gives birth to a brand new human being.If one of the people you are referring to is me, I'm baffled as to why you feel that way. I've said men and women are equally responsible (biologically and morally) for pregnancy.Honestly, I'm still baffled by why two gay guys seem to be so offended at women wanting men to take more responsibility for preventing pregnancies.
Okay, let me try this again.
You say "men and women are equally responsible for pregnancy"
You support this with reference to pregnancy requiring both an egg and a sperm
Toni and I say "women are considered way more responsible for preventing pregnancy than men"
And we make the argument that because men have a very large degree of control over when they ejaculate, and because the means of preventing pregnancy are very, very easy for men to employ in multiple ways, men should have more responsibility for preventing pregnancy than they do now.
So, first off, do you get that you're talking about something different than what Toni and I are talking about?
You are talking about responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
You are talking about men and women having equal biological responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about men and women having very unequal social responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
I dunno. Those were some very direct quotes that absolutely supported my claim.@Emily LakeMost of this thread has been men assuring me that they have no responsibility for preventing a pregnancy.
Quote mining people explaining that both parties have responsibility in no way supports the claim that @Toni made here.
Tom
Small correction: biologically speaking g, it requires a sperm(male) to fertilize an ovum( female) plus the right conditions for the fertilized egg to properly divide and then implant in the uterine lining instead of being expelled or implanting inappropriately elsewhere, plus all of the female parent’s organs and tissues to continue to provide needed nutrition, waste management, etc. for the embryo to gestate until it is a fully developed fetus at 40 weeks gestation, at which point the female parent exerts tremendous effort and energy and experiences tremendous risk while doing so and gives birth to a brand new human being.If one of the people you are referring to is me, I'm baffled as to why you feel that way. I've said men and women are equally responsible (biologically and morally) for pregnancy.Honestly, I'm still baffled by why two gay guys seem to be so offended at women wanting men to take more responsibility for preventing pregnancies.
Okay, let me try this again.
You say "men and women are equally responsible for pregnancy"
You support this with reference to pregnancy requiring both an egg and a sperm
Toni and I say "women are considered way more responsible for preventing pregnancy than men"
And we make the argument that because men have a very large degree of control over when they ejaculate, and because the means of preventing pregnancy are very, very easy for men to employ in multiple ways, men should have more responsibility for preventing pregnancy than they do now.
So, first off, do you get that you're talking about something different than what Toni and I are talking about?
You are talking about responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
You are talking about men and women having equal biological responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about men and women having very unequal social responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
Post ejaculation, the male parent has zero to do with pregnancy. He can be supportive or absent but his biological role is over in a couple of minutes.
All of that aside, I admit that I am flummoxed to grasp how any pregnancy can occur if the male does not ejaculate inside or near a vagina.
Which does not occur if some man did not ejaculate.Small correction: biologically speaking g, it requires a sperm(male) to fertilize an ovum( female) plus the right conditions for the fertilized egg to properly divide and then implant in the uterine lining instead of being expelled or implanting inappropriately elsewhere, plus all of the female parent’s organs and tissues to continue to provide needed nutrition, waste management, etc. for the embryo to gestate until it is a fully developed fetus at 40 weeks gestation, at which point the female parent exerts tremendous effort and energy and experiences tremendous risk while doing so and gives birth to a brand new human being.If one of the people you are referring to is me, I'm baffled as to why you feel that way. I've said men and women are equally responsible (biologically and morally) for pregnancy.Honestly, I'm still baffled by why two gay guys seem to be so offended at women wanting men to take more responsibility for preventing pregnancies.
Okay, let me try this again.
You say "men and women are equally responsible for pregnancy"
You support this with reference to pregnancy requiring both an egg and a sperm
Toni and I say "women are considered way more responsible for preventing pregnancy than men"
And we make the argument that because men have a very large degree of control over when they ejaculate, and because the means of preventing pregnancy are very, very easy for men to employ in multiple ways, men should have more responsibility for preventing pregnancy than they do now.
So, first off, do you get that you're talking about something different than what Toni and I are talking about?
You are talking about responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
You are talking about men and women having equal biological responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about men and women having very unequal social responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
Post ejaculation, the male parent has zero to do with pregnancy. He can be supportive or absent but his biological role is over in a couple of minutes.
All of that aside, I admit that I am flummoxed to grasp how any pregnancy can occur if the male does not ejaculate inside or near a vagina.
Really, you are completely ignorant of IVF?
Yeah, you keep saying that. And we keep saying "so what"? It doesn't somehow make men more responsible for pregnancy, either biologically or morally.Which does not occur if some man did not ejaculate.Small correction: biologically speaking g, it requires a sperm(male) to fertilize an ovum( female) plus the right conditions for the fertilized egg to properly divide and then implant in the uterine lining instead of being expelled or implanting inappropriately elsewhere, plus all of the female parent’s organs and tissues to continue to provide needed nutrition, waste management, etc. for the embryo to gestate until it is a fully developed fetus at 40 weeks gestation, at which point the female parent exerts tremendous effort and energy and experiences tremendous risk while doing so and gives birth to a brand new human being.If one of the people you are referring to is me, I'm baffled as to why you feel that way. I've said men and women are equally responsible (biologically and morally) for pregnancy.Honestly, I'm still baffled by why two gay guys seem to be so offended at women wanting men to take more responsibility for preventing pregnancies.
Okay, let me try this again.
You say "men and women are equally responsible for pregnancy"
You support this with reference to pregnancy requiring both an egg and a sperm
Toni and I say "women are considered way more responsible for preventing pregnancy than men"
And we make the argument that because men have a very large degree of control over when they ejaculate, and because the means of preventing pregnancy are very, very easy for men to employ in multiple ways, men should have more responsibility for preventing pregnancy than they do now.
So, first off, do you get that you're talking about something different than what Toni and I are talking about?
You are talking about responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
You are talking about men and women having equal biological responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about men and women having very unequal social responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
Post ejaculation, the male parent has zero to do with pregnancy. He can be supportive or absent but his biological role is over in a couple of minutes.
All of that aside, I admit that I am flummoxed to grasp how any pregnancy can occur if the male does not ejaculate inside or near a vagina.
Really, you are completely ignorant of IVF?
Not really. I know a woman who donated an egg to an infertile couple (a lot more taxing than jerking off in to a cup, though I don't think she had to aim). She already had two children; it was an act of altruism.Also besides the point as women undergoing IVF want to become pregnant. Presumably the man wanted to procreate as well.
Yes, biologically, reproduction is far more taxing for a woman than for a man, no matter the circumstance.Yeah, you keep saying that. And we keep saying "so what"? It doesn't somehow make men more responsible for pregnancy, either biologically or morally.Which does not occur if some man did not ejaculate.Small correction: biologically speaking g, it requires a sperm(male) to fertilize an ovum( female) plus the right conditions for the fertilized egg to properly divide and then implant in the uterine lining instead of being expelled or implanting inappropriately elsewhere, plus all of the female parent’s organs and tissues to continue to provide needed nutrition, waste management, etc. for the embryo to gestate until it is a fully developed fetus at 40 weeks gestation, at which point the female parent exerts tremendous effort and energy and experiences tremendous risk while doing so and gives birth to a brand new human being.If one of the people you are referring to is me, I'm baffled as to why you feel that way. I've said men and women are equally responsible (biologically and morally) for pregnancy.Honestly, I'm still baffled by why two gay guys seem to be so offended at women wanting men to take more responsibility for preventing pregnancies.
Okay, let me try this again.
You say "men and women are equally responsible for pregnancy"
You support this with reference to pregnancy requiring both an egg and a sperm
Toni and I say "women are considered way more responsible for preventing pregnancy than men"
And we make the argument that because men have a very large degree of control over when they ejaculate, and because the means of preventing pregnancy are very, very easy for men to employ in multiple ways, men should have more responsibility for preventing pregnancy than they do now.
So, first off, do you get that you're talking about something different than what Toni and I are talking about?
You are talking about responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
You are talking about men and women having equal biological responsibility for pregnancy.
We are talking about men and women having very unequal social responsibility for preventing pregnancy.
Post ejaculation, the male parent has zero to do with pregnancy. He can be supportive or absent but his biological role is over in a couple of minutes.
All of that aside, I admit that I am flummoxed to grasp how any pregnancy can occur if the male does not ejaculate inside or near a vagina.
Really, you are completely ignorant of IVF?
Not really. I know a woman who donated an egg to an infertile couple (a lot more taxing than jerking off in to a cup, though I don't think she had to aim). She already had two children; it was an act of altruism.Also besides the point as women undergoing IVF want to become pregnant. Presumably the man wanted to procreate as well.
Those were some very direct excerpts from posts, with which Emily helpfully provided links so anyone can click on them to check whether the full context contradicts your claim. Which I did, and which they did.I dunno. Those were some very direct quotes that absolutely supported my claim.@Emily LakeMost of this thread has been men assuring me that they have no responsibility for preventing a pregnancy.
Quote mining people explaining that both parties have responsibility in no way supports the claim that @Toni made here.
Tom
Even if it isn’t convenient to you.
Where did anyone say that?
Here on this forum?
You let a penis in, the expectation should be that there will be sperm unless you have previously agreed on withdrawal or have been told there is no sperm.
As you can see, the full context contains Loren saying "A woman who allows sperm to be released into her vagina is just as responsible as the man who released it."; it does not contain Loren assuring you that men "have no responsibility for preventing a pregnancy."You let a penis in, the expectation should be that there will be sperm unless you have previously agreed on withdrawal or have been told there is no sperm.Uh huh. And do you think that consensual sex automatically implies "Yay, please cum inside me!"?Most sperm ends up in her vagina through consensual activity.How exactly does a woman refuse to allow sperm to be released into her vagina? Walk me through how you think this works, please.It's voluntary--on both sides. A woman who allows sperm to be released into her vagina is just as responsible as the man who released it.But not the release of sperm in a vagina.
Or do you think that perhaps, just perhaps, there's a social expectation that women should be the ones who have to always be responsible about ensuring they don't get pregnant, and that men are excused from that responsibility altogether?
Did you even bother to read the article I linked?
etc.
All of that aside, I admit that I am flummoxed to grasp how any pregnancy can occur if the male does not ejaculate inside or near a vagina. The process of inserting a penis into a vagina does require effort on the part of the male parent. The female parent need make little or no effort and indeed, might seriously attempt to prevent the penis from
entering her vagina.
Surely none of this is new information to anyone or controversial in any way.
Nothing I’ve written is new information—something that I’ve pointed out myself. More than once.All of that aside, I admit that I am flummoxed to grasp how any pregnancy can occur if the male does not ejaculate inside or near a vagina. The process of inserting a penis into a vagina does require effort on the part of the male parent. The female parent need make little or no effort and indeed, might seriously attempt to prevent the penis from
entering her vagina.
Surely none of this is new information to anyone or controversial in any way.
Correct, none of that is new information to anyone nor is it controversial in anyway. You’re doing a sterling job of making sure no new information or new controversies are introduced to confuse things.
Argue? Who’s arguing? I agree, you did not post any new information and continue to not post any new information.Nothing I’ve written is new information—something that I’ve pointed out myself. More than once.All of that aside, I admit that I am flummoxed to grasp how any pregnancy can occur if the male does not ejaculate inside or near a vagina. The process of inserting a penis into a vagina does require effort on the part of the male parent. The female parent need make little or no effort and indeed, might seriously attempt to prevent the penis from
entering her vagina.
Surely none of this is new information to anyone or controversial in any way.
Correct, none of that is new information to anyone nor is it controversial in anyway. You’re doing a sterling job of making sure no new information or new controversies are introduced to confuse things.
I don’t see how anything I’ve written is controversial. At all.
Yet here you are, telling me what I’ve already said: nothing I’ve written is new information.
Do why ya gotta argue about it?.
I get it. You just have to have the last word.Argue? Who’s arguing? I agree, you did not post any new information and continue to not post any new information.Nothing I’ve written is new information—something that I’ve pointed out myself. More than once.All of that aside, I admit that I am flummoxed to grasp how any pregnancy can occur if the male does not ejaculate inside or near a vagina. The process of inserting a penis into a vagina does require effort on the part of the male parent. The female parent need make little or no effort and indeed, might seriously attempt to prevent the penis from
entering her vagina.
Surely none of this is new information to anyone or controversial in any way.
Correct, none of that is new information to anyone nor is it controversial in anyway. You’re doing a sterling job of making sure no new information or new controversies are introduced to confuse things.
I don’t see how anything I’ve written is controversial. At all.
Yet here you are, telling me what I’ve already said: nothing I’ve written is new information.
Do why ya gotta argue about it?.
Oh I get it, you need to get your post count up. Or you have Tourette Syndrome? Or is there a point to you posting no new information ? Am I missing something? I feel I’m missing something.I get it. You just have to have the last word.Argue? Who’s arguing? I agree, you did not post any new information and continue to not post any new information.Nothing I’ve written is new information—something that I’ve pointed out myself. More than once.All of that aside, I admit that I am flummoxed to grasp how any pregnancy can occur if the male does not ejaculate inside or near a vagina. The process of inserting a penis into a vagina does require effort on the part of the male parent. The female parent need make little or no effort and indeed, might seriously attempt to prevent the penis from
entering her vagina.
Surely none of this is new information to anyone or controversial in any way.
Correct, none of that is new information to anyone nor is it controversial in anyway. You’re doing a sterling job of making sure no new information or new controversies are introduced to confuse things.
I don’t see how anything I’ve written is controversial. At all.
Yet here you are, telling me what I’ve already said: nothing I’ve written is new information.
Do why ya gotta argue about it?.
Oh I get it, you need to get your post count up. Or you have Tourette Syndrome? Or is there a point to you posting no new information ? Am I missing something? I feel I’m missing something.