• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Who is responsible for pregnancies? (Derail from: Policies that will reduce abortions)

Status
Not open for further replies.

Emily Lake

Might be a replicant
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
4,235
Location
It's a desert out there
Gender
Agenderist
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Edited*

There are a whole lot of necessary elements for a pregnancy to occur. Just like with a car engine. Needs to have a central chamber, pistons, spark plugs, etc. Lots and lots of bits need to be there, all doing their part. That said... without gasoline, the engine cannot work. The gas is the catalyst injected into a system that makes it happen. If other parts of the system are lacking, sure, the engine won't work either. But the gas is still the catalyst.

And just like someone has to exert agency to put the gas in the tank to make the engine work... the sperm-injector is a voluntary actor that has complete control over whether the sperm gets inside or not.

A woman can say "No, I don't want to have sex.". She can say "No, I won't have sex without a condom" or "No, you cannot cum inside me". But at the end of the day, the woman cannot actually control whether or not the sperm gets there. No more so than the engine can reject the gasoline.

You know that when women gas up their cars they put the nozzle in the gas tank themselves and pump the gas themselves, yeah?

Sometimes women are so horny they do the same with men’s cocks. Grab the cock, put it in the vagina and start pumping, consequences be damned.
Sure. But unlike the gas nozzle, the man can say no and take his cock out! What an amazing concept! It's magic!
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,706
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Edited*

There are a whole lot of necessary elements for a pregnancy to occur. Just like with a car engine. Needs to have a central chamber, pistons, spark plugs, etc. Lots and lots of bits need to be there, all doing their part. That said... without gasoline, the engine cannot work. The gas is the catalyst injected into a system that makes it happen. If other parts of the system are lacking, sure, the engine won't work either. But the gas is still the catalyst.

And just like someone has to exert agency to put the gas in the tank to make the engine work... the sperm-injector is a voluntary actor that has complete control over whether the sperm gets inside or not.

A woman can say "No, I don't want to have sex.". She can say "No, I won't have sex without a condom" or "No, you cannot cum inside me". But at the end of the day, the woman cannot actually control whether or not the sperm gets there. No more so than the engine can reject the gasoline.

You know that when women gas up their cars they put the nozzle in the gas tank themselves and pump the gas themselves, yeah?

Sometimes women are so horny they do the same with men’s cocks. Grab the cock, put it in the vagina and start pumping, consequences be damned.
Sure. But unlike the gas nozzle, the man can say no and take his cock out! What an amazing concept! It's magic!

Yeah, but the woman needn't have put the cock in and the woman is free to disengage from the cock at anytime. (this applies to consensual sex of course. I have no desire to get into some dumb comment about rape which is an entirely different scenario and conversation. )

Oh and I'm pretty sure that is an arrangement between couples where the man does take his cock out before ejaculation. Not the most reliable form of birth control but if that's what the two parties agree to then buyer beware.
 
Last edited:

Jarhyn

Wizard
Joined
Mar 29, 2010
Messages
10,756
Gender
Androgyne; they/them
Basic Beliefs
Natural Philosophy, Game Theoretic Ethicist
Edited*

There are a whole lot of necessary elements for a pregnancy to occur. Just like with a car engine. Needs to have a central chamber, pistons, spark plugs, etc. Lots and lots of bits need to be there, all doing their part. That said... without gasoline, the engine cannot work. The gas is the catalyst injected into a system that makes it happen. If other parts of the system are lacking, sure, the engine won't work either. But the gas is still the catalyst.

And just like someone has to exert agency to put the gas in the tank to make the engine work... the sperm-injector is a voluntary actor that has complete control over whether the sperm gets inside or not.

A woman can say "No, I don't want to have sex.". She can say "No, I won't have sex without a condom" or "No, you cannot cum inside me". But at the end of the day, the woman cannot actually control whether or not the sperm gets there. No more so than the engine can reject the gasoline.

You know that when women gas up their cars they put the nozzle in the gas tank themselves and pump the gas themselves, yeah?

Sometimes women are so horny they do the same with men’s cocks. Grab the cock, put it in the vagina and start pumping, consequences be damned.
Sure. But unlike the gas nozzle, the man can say no and take his cock out! What an amazing concept! It's magic!
So, regardless of our conflicts, I will grant that the vast majority of people affected by testosterone have an active compartmentalization that is selected for, and driven/powered by the parts of the brain that get so potentiated by that chemical.

In some ways I wonder if this isn't the primary indicator, really, of whether someone attempts transition of some sort away from Testosterone, namely the visibility of the compartment.

All I knew is that a new song I didn't like started being sung in the network of my neurons, and I know explicitly when it started, I heard... Most of the words of the tune, and I didn't like them.

Principally, for 30 years, I have had this song playing in my head and all I wanted to do was to shut it off.

Most people are "deaf" to it, even if they step to it's beat.

But I'm not sure if every "man" can just take his cock out. There's something in there conflicting with that directive saying "oh no you don't, you're gonna jizz in there". Honestly even knowing it's there doesn't always help.

Every testostronaut has slightly different experiences here, but most certainly there's something hidden to most, just beneath the ignorance of the surface layer.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,356
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
Edited*

There are a whole lot of necessary elements for a pregnancy to occur. Just like with a car engine. Needs to have a central chamber, pistons, spark plugs, etc. Lots and lots of bits need to be there, all doing their part. That said... without gasoline, the engine cannot work. The gas is the catalyst injected into a system that makes it happen. If other parts of the system are lacking, sure, the engine won't work either. But the gas is still the catalyst.

And just like someone has to exert agency to put the gas in the tank to make the engine work... the sperm-injector is a voluntary actor that has complete control over whether the sperm gets inside or not.

A woman can say "No, I don't want to have sex.". She can say "No, I won't have sex without a condom" or "No, you cannot cum inside me". But at the end of the day, the woman cannot actually control whether or not the sperm gets there. No more so than the engine can reject the gasoline.

You know that when women gas up their cars they put the nozzle in the gas tank themselves and pump the gas themselves, yeah?

Sometimes women are so horny they do the same with men’s cocks. Grab the cock, put it in the vagina and start pumping, consequences be damned.
Sure. But unlike the gas nozzle, the man can say no and take his cock out! What an amazing concept! It's magic!
That begs the question of how the cock became available to use. Or is the cock still in the pants when this happens?
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Emily, this sounds like you think men have more responsibility than women for conception. Is that what you actually think?
I think men have more CONTROL over conception than women do. I also think that men are not expected to exert that control in order to prevent a pregnancy.

Just step back and consider the framing in this thread. How many times has someone essentially said "if a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she shouldn't have sex"? That message has been repeated many times.

How often in this thread have people said "if a man doesn't want to cause a pregnancy, he shouldn't have sex"? A couple of us have said it as a way to highlight the uneven nature of the discussion. But it hasn't been said in absolute seriousness.

Why not?
Oh, I’ve been very serious when I’ve said that if men don’t want to risk causing a pregnancy, they should abstain from sex.
 

Harry Bosch

Contributor
Joined
Jul 4, 2014
Messages
6,036
Location
Washington
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Emily, this sounds like you think men have more responsibility than women for conception. Is that what you actually think?
I think men have more CONTROL over conception than women do. I also think that men are not expected to exert that control in order to prevent a pregnancy.

Just step back and consider the framing in this thread. How many times has someone essentially said "if a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she shouldn't have sex"? That message has been repeated many times.

How often in this thread have people said "if a man doesn't want to cause a pregnancy, he shouldn't have sex"? A couple of us have said it as a way to highlight the uneven nature of the discussion. But it hasn't been said in absolute seriousness.

Why not?
Oh, I’ve been very serious when I’ve said that if men don’t want to risk causing a pregnancy, they should abstain from sex.
Yea, I sure don't think what you are saying is very controversial! Seems like a no brainer to me
 

Jimmy Higgins

Contributor
Joined
Feb 1, 2001
Messages
37,031
Basic Beliefs
Calvinistic Atheist
I'm curious, now that abortion can be made illegal, this effectively means that men that father children are responsible for raising a child now, right?
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

Why is it so much to ask that we alter the narrative on this? Why is it such a burden to consider reframing that as "depositing ejaculate into a woman's vagina means you're taking on the risk of getting her pregnant"?

Why on earth does it get so much pushback and argument to suggest that men should be expected to take a greater role in the prevention of pregnancy than they do now?

I'm actually a bit baffled on your position on this, Met, seeing as you don't stick your dick in vijayjays in the first place, so exactly zero of this has any impact on you. This seems like it runs into the area where you pretty much just hold a pretty negative view of women overall.
I'm counter-baffled at the amount of resistance and pushback that my original statement got. In consensual penis-in-vagina sex, both sperm and an egg(s) are required for fertilisation. One gamete is not somehow more necessary than the other. Both parties are equally 'causative'.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
I'm curious, now that abortion can be made illegal, this effectively means that men that father children are responsible for raising a child now, right?
I don't see how fathers would have more or fewer (legal) responsibilities than they do now.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
Emily, this sounds like you think men have more responsibility than women for conception. Is that what you actually think?
I think men have more CONTROL over conception than women do.
Except they don't. They have much less. A moderately educated woman knows her cycle and her 'windows' of fertility better than any man.

I also think that men are not expected to exert that control in order to prevent a pregnancy.

Just step back and consider the framing in this thread. How many times has someone essentially said "if a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she shouldn't have sex"? That message has been repeated many times.

How often in this thread have people said "if a man doesn't want to cause a pregnancy, he shouldn't have sex"? A couple of us have said it as a way to highlight the uneven nature of the discussion. But it hasn't been said in absolute seriousness.

Why not?
Well, I don't see what is wrong with either statement (except I'd add penis-in-vagina sex to the description).

I will add, however, that even if society absolutely expected men to be as responsible for avoiding unwanted fertilisations as it does for women, societal expectations won't change biology. Women have to bear the biological burden of the fertilisation and as such, I would expect women would always be more cautious and vigilant.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
Edited*

There are a whole lot of necessary elements for a pregnancy to occur. Just like with a car engine. Needs to have a central chamber, pistons, spark plugs, etc. Lots and lots of bits need to be there, all doing their part. That said... without gasoline, the engine cannot work. The gas is the catalyst injected into a system that makes it happen. If other parts of the system are lacking, sure, the engine won't work either. But the gas is still the catalyst.

And just like someone has to exert agency to put the gas in the tank to make the engine work... the sperm-injector is a voluntary actor that has complete control over whether the sperm gets inside or not.

A woman can say "No, I don't want to have sex.". She can say "No, I won't have sex without a condom" or "No, you cannot cum inside me". But at the end of the day, the woman cannot actually control whether or not the sperm gets there. No more so than the engine can reject the gasoline.

You know that when women gas up their cars they put the nozzle in the gas tank themselves and pump the gas themselves, yeah?

Sometimes women are so horny they do the same with men’s cocks. Grab the cock, put it in the vagina and start pumping, consequences be damned.
Sure. But unlike the gas nozzle, the man can say no and take his cock out! What an amazing concept! It's magic!
So, regardless of our conflicts, I will grant that the vast majority of people affected by testosterone have an active compartmentalization that is selected for, and driven/powered by the parts of the brain that get so potentiated by that chemical.

In some ways I wonder if this isn't the primary indicator, really, of whether someone attempts transition of some sort away from Testosterone, namely the visibility of the compartment.

All I knew is that a new song I didn't like started being sung in the network of my neurons, and I know explicitly when it started, I heard... Most of the words of the tune, and I didn't like them.

Principally, for 30 years, I have had this song playing in my head and all I wanted to do was to shut it off.

Most people are "deaf" to it, even if they step to it's beat.

But I'm not sure if every "man" can just take his cock out. There's something in there conflicting with that directive saying "oh no you don't, you're gonna jizz in there". Honestly even knowing it's there doesn't always help.

Every testostronaut has slightly different experiences here, but most certainly there's something hidden to most, just beneath the ignorance of the surface layer.
You should not generalise your sexual control issues to the majority of men.
 

Bomb#20

Contributor
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
6,451
Location
California
Gender
It's a free country.
Basic Beliefs
Rationalism
Surely the obvious point is that there are a lot of necessary parts, and there is no reason to pick out just one of them from the set and say the process "begins" with that one unless speaker means to ascribe uniqueness to it.
You're not wrong... but I think there's a bit more involved here. There are a whole lot of necessary elements for a pregnancy to occur. Just like with a car engine. Needs to have a central chamber, pistons, spark plugs, etc. Lots and lots of bits need to be there, all doing their part. That said... without gasoline, the engine cannot work. The gas is the catalyst injected into a system that makes it happen. If other parts of the system are lacking, sure, the engine won't work either. But the gas is still the catalyst.

Same concept here. There are a lot of elements - inside a woman's body - that have to be there for a pregnancy to occur. If there's not an egg, not a uterine lining, etc. there won't be a pregnancy. But the sperm is the catalyst.
I don't understand your argument. A catalyst is an ingredient in a chemical reaction that needs to be there for the reaction to occur but that does not get used up in the reaction and is still there after the reaction completes. Literally every one of those elements of the car engine is a better fit for "catalyst" than the gasoline is. So when you call the gasoline the catalyst, I can't guess what characteristic you mean to be ascribing to it that the engine parts lack. Can you tell me what you're using "catalyst" as a metaphor for? Or just make your underlying argument without using a metaphor?

And just like someone has to exert agency to put the gas in the tank to make the engine work... the sperm-injector is a voluntary actor that has complete control over whether the sperm gets inside or not.

A woman can say "No, I don't want to have sex.". She can say "No, I won't have sex without a condom" or "No, you cannot cum inside me". But at the end of the day, the woman cannot actually control whether or not the sperm gets there. No more so than the engine can reject the gasoline.
The engine can't reject the gasoline because it's a mindless machine without awareness or preferences or voluntary actions. I don't think you're claiming the woman is a mindless machine or lacking awareness or lacking preferences or not a voluntary actor. So when you say she can't control whether the sperm gets there, even though she is a voluntary actor too and has complete control over whether she says "No, I don't want to have sex.", you appear to be referring specifically to the fact that in the event that the man is the sort who won't be stopped by "No, I don't want to have sex." and has the physical strength to overpower her, then her choice to reject the sperm won't be what controls whether or not the sperm gets there. Is that what you're getting at?

If that's what you're getting at, then your argument appears to amount to "The woman has no control and the sperm injector has complete control over whether the sperm gets inside if he's a rapist. Therefore the woman has no control and the sperm injector has complete control over whether the sperm gets inside even if he isn't a rapist." That conclusion does not follow from that premise. If there's more to your argument than this, please explain.
 

Bomb#20

Contributor
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
6,451
Location
California
Gender
It's a free country.
Basic Beliefs
Rationalism
How is the statement: ‘Every pregnancy begins with some man ejaculating’ false, from a biological standpoint?
:facepalm:
I didn't say it was false! False would be a step up for it. From a biological standpoint, your statement is "not even wrong". It is an unfalsifiable metaphysical claim. Whether it is true or false has no effect on any observable phenomenon. From a biological standpoint it is not a statement about biology. It's catechism, exactly like "life begins at conception."

I made no claim that ejaculation was sufficient; merely that it is necessary.
But the circumstance of it being necessary does not provide any support for your contentions against Loren, Metaphor, etc. A lot of steps are necessary for a pregnancy.
And the one that is the most arbitrary part is within the guy's control.
Do you have a way to measure arbitrariness, or are you joining with Toni in making unfalsifiable metaphysical claims?

So much has been made about consent (which actually makes it not rape), but in the end, if the guy doesn't want to get the woman pregnant, he has the most control of that destiny.
"The guy", you say, much the way many early-20th-century social commentators made claims about "the Jew". Which particular guy are you referring to when you say "the guy"?

Some guys are rapists. Other guys are not rapists. If by "the guy", you were referring to a rapist, then your claim appears to have been correct. If by "the guy", you were referring to a non-rapist, then show your work. It looks to me like a non-rapist and a woman have equal control of whether he will get her pregnant. Or are you perhaps claiming all men are rapists?

No amount of consent counts as pregnancy risk mitigation.
If you're talking about sex between a woman and a non-rapist, the "consent=zero" amount of consent counts as a considerable amount of pregnancy risk mitigation. If you're talking about sex between a woman and a rapist, the "consent=zero" amount of consent doesn't count as any pregnancy risk mitigation. Therefore the statement "No amount of consent counts as pregnancy risk mitigation." appears to be extensionally equivalent to the statement "All men physically capable of impregnating women are rapists." Is that what you meant to claim?

If the guy doesn't want her to get pregnant, he can partake in a few different actions to greatly reduce the risk.
What's your point? If a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she can also partake in a few different actions to greatly reduce the risk.

The guy is the final firewall on pregnancy risk.
Not if she's using a diaphragm. Why is "final" relevant, anyway? What difference does the order of the firewalls make for determining responsibility?

The woman can consent all she wants, but it is the guy that lights the fuse.
I.e., you are making an analogy between something a guy does and lighting a fuse. Somebody else can make an analogy between something a woman does and lighting a fuse. How does your ability to make up an analogy have any more substantive implication than Toni's ability to pick her favorite necessary but not sufficient event and claim pregnancy "begins" with it?

If there is consent, there is culpability amount both partners for a pregnancy. But that doesn't make any of the above not true.
Only if the pregnancy is a wrongdoing, say, if the partners know they're likely causing a birth defect. Pregnancy isn't normally the sort of thing culpability attaches to.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Emily, this sounds like you think men have more responsibility than women for conception. Is that what you actually think?
I think men have more CONTROL over conception than women do.
Except they don't. They have much less. A moderately educated woman knows her cycle and her 'windows' of fertility better than any man.

I also think that men are not expected to exert that control in order to prevent a pregnancy.

Just step back and consider the framing in this thread. How many times has someone essentially said "if a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she shouldn't have sex"? That message has been repeated many times.

How often in this thread have people said "if a man doesn't want to cause a pregnancy, he shouldn't have sex"? A couple of us have said it as a way to highlight the uneven nature of the discussion. But it hasn't been said in absolute seriousness.

Why not?
Well, I don't see what is wrong with either statement (except I'd add penis-in-vagina sex to the description).

I will add, however, that even if society absolutely expected men to be as responsible for avoiding unwanted fertilisations as it does for women, societal expectations won't change biology. Women have to bear the biological burden of the fertilisation and as such, I would expect women would always be more cautious and vigilant.
Wow.

I never took you for a catholic priest before. Learn something new every day.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
Emily, this sounds like you think men have more responsibility than women for conception. Is that what you actually think?
I think men have more CONTROL over conception than women do.
Except they don't. They have much less. A moderately educated woman knows her cycle and her 'windows' of fertility better than any man.

I also think that men are not expected to exert that control in order to prevent a pregnancy.

Just step back and consider the framing in this thread. How many times has someone essentially said "if a woman doesn't want to get pregnant, she shouldn't have sex"? That message has been repeated many times.

How often in this thread have people said "if a man doesn't want to cause a pregnancy, he shouldn't have sex"? A couple of us have said it as a way to highlight the uneven nature of the discussion. But it hasn't been said in absolute seriousness.

Why not?
Well, I don't see what is wrong with either statement (except I'd add penis-in-vagina sex to the description).

I will add, however, that even if society absolutely expected men to be as responsible for avoiding unwanted fertilisations as it does for women, societal expectations won't change biology. Women have to bear the biological burden of the fertilisation and as such, I would expect women would always be more cautious and vigilant.
Wow.

I never took you for a catholic priest before. Learn something new every day.
Um, okay.

What, specifically, did I say that was 'Catholic priesty'?

I think it is "if something unwanted can happen to you, you should and will taken precautions to prevent it from happening. But if something unwanted can never happen to you, you don't need to take precautions against it".

Men cannot ever become pregnant, accidentally or not. Men don't need to take precautions against becoming pregnant. I will never ever need to take precautions against becoming pregnant.

This is a biological reality. I don't know what is "Catholic priesty" about that.
 

Bomb#20

Contributor
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
6,451
Location
California
Gender
It's a free country.
Basic Beliefs
Rationalism
Can a pregnancy occur without a man committing the voluntary act that is ejaculating?
Yes, of course it can. Ejaculations do not have to be voluntary and they do not have to be in connection with sexual activity.

But, when a man voluntary ejaculates into a woman's vagina, and she has voluntarily consented to that ejaculate, they both played an equal and necessary role in any resulting conception.

Alright, I'm genuinely curious what sort of non-sexual involuntary ejaculation can result in a pregnancy.
That's the story line of The World According to Garp.
 

Bomb#20

Contributor
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
6,451
Location
California
Gender
It's a free country.
Basic Beliefs
Rationalism
Of course there is no possibility of the man falling pregnant. So what? That does not make him somehow more responsible for the woman's pregnancy than he already was or wasn't.

Let's be real here. Right now the man's portion of responsibility for avoiding an unwanted pregnancy is zero, zilch, nada, nothing. ... It takes two to create a pregnancy, but right now ONLY ONE IS CONSIDERED RESPONSIBLE FOR AVOIDING PREGNANCY.
Can you please rewrite that sentence without using passive voice?

It beggars belief that this is still being debated. When a woman consents to penis-in-vagina sex she is as responsible for any resulting conception as the man who ejaculated sperm into her.
And we've come right back around to "If a chick doesn't want to get herself preggers, she should just keep her legs shut". All of the responsibility for avoiding a pregnancy is being placed on the woman.
Can you also please rewrite that sentence without using passive voice?

[Note: I am not an English teacher. People can use any grammar they please. This post is not on the topic of the alleged stylistic inferiority of passive voice.]
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Birth control fails. Every single method fails sometimes. Including sterilization.

Sure, some birth control methods have a higher failure rate than others but all have a failure rate >zero. Name a method and I absolutely guarantee I personally know someone who got pregnant using that method:

The pill: several
IUD: yep
Diaphragm: oh, yes
Rhythm method ( for all of you guys who think women should just know their cycle: I live in a very Catholic town. I know a lot of people who came into being because their parents used the rhythm method
Abstinence: Yeah. A friend got pregnant when she was raped. Another friend got pregnant during domestic assault—rape, although she was too traumatized to call it that. Or to report it. She refused to use the word rape because they were married. But yes, unless the fear and panic in her face, her voice, her body language were the best acting in the planet—rape. They’re still married. I don’t understand why but they are.

Pull out: Yes. As pointed out unthread, sperm can be present in pre-ejaculatory fluid. And let’s be honest: not every guy has as much self control as would be ideal, particularly young and/or less experienced guys,

Condoms: definitely yes—condoms come off or break or??? How the heck did that happen?? Or weren’t used as promised.


Over and over men in this thread have sought to limit discussion to whatever they term is consensual sex. Not all pregnancies occur because of consensual sex.
 

Bomb#20

Contributor
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
6,451
Location
California
Gender
It's a free country.
Basic Beliefs
Rationalism
Over and over men in this thread have sought to limit discussion to whatever they term is consensual sex. Not all pregnancies occur because of consensual sex.
It's not about limiting discussion. Discuss nonconsensual sex all you want. It's about some folks here using nonspecific talk of sex as way to sweep the distinction between consensual sex and nonconsensual sex under the rug, so as to perpetrate an equivocation fallacy of the form "Men are more responsible than women for nonconsensual sex. Therefore men are more responsible than women for sex. Therefore men are more responsible than women for consensual sex." The circumstance that it's your thread and it's a free* country entitles you to talk about nonconsensual sex all you please but it does not entitle you to use a transparently illogical line of reasoning and not get called on it.

(* Well, free until yesterday.)
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,722
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

That's a risk she chose to take.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

That's a risk she chose to take.
How? By being female? Because that choice was made by her dad, not her.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

That's a risk she chose to take.
How? By being female? Because that choice was made by her dad, not her.
My goodness no wonder women are afraid of the patriarchy. Men can decide the sex of their children!
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,706
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Over and over men in this thread have sought to limit discussion to whatever they term is consensual sex.

Nope, but you do want to limit the discussion to be about the incidents where it’s non consensual. And you pretty much view any sexual encounter a woman has with a man as being non consensual and it’s always the man’s fault a woman gets pregnant. It’s just the dumb game you play. You have nothing to offer on the discussion other than that. It’s not relevant, it’s predictable and it’s quite funny in a way. It’s like your catchphrase. #notallpregnanciesoccurbecauseofconsensualsex. #allmenarerapists.


Not all pregnancies occur because of consensual sex.

Some pregnancies are IVF. Still the man’s fault because he jerked off into cup six months earlier. Still non consensual probably. It’s a form of rape I suppose.

And if women don’t want to get pregnant they should do it standing up. That’s what I heard back in high school, if you did it standing up the girl wouldn’t get pregnant.
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,356
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

That's a risk she chose to take.
So? That's like dismissing the death of a pedestrian who is killed by a drunk driver while crossing the street with the light and in a crosswalk with "That's the risk they choose to take."
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Over and over men in this thread have sought to limit discussion to whatever they term is consensual sex.

Nope, but you do want to limit the discussion to be about the incidents where it’s non consensual. And you pretty much view any sexual encounter a woman has with a man as being non consensual and it’s always the man’s fault a woman gets pregnant. It’s just the dumb game you play. You have nothing to offer on the discussion other than that. It’s not relevant, it’s predictable and it’s quite funny in a way. It’s like your catchphrase. #notallpregnanciesoccurbecauseofconsensualsex. #allmenarerapists.


Not all pregnancies occur because of consensual sex.

Some pregnancies are IVF. Still the man’s fault because he jerked off into cup six months earlier. Still non consensual probably. It’s a form of rape I suppose.

And if women don’t want to get pregnant they should do it standing up. That’s what I heard back in high school, if you did it standing up the girl wouldn’t get pregnant.
Please quit trying to tell me what I think or want. You’re wrong and it’s even more embarrassing towards you than it is condescending towards me.

My original statement made no distinction between consensual sex, rape or IVF or other assisted reproductive strategies.

I’m not assigning blame or fault or even responsibility. I’m stating a fact: with the exception of that very tiny number of cases such as Metaphor described with regards to his comatose brother, in order for pregnancy to happen, a man ejaculates, usually inside or near a vagina but sometimes in a sample cup.

Some want to equate ejaculation with ovulation when those are not analogous. Men’s bodies produce sperm on an ongoing basis from puberty onward, with production falling off as the man ages. Women are born with their entire lifetime’s supply of ova already present.

In almost every case, a man must take action in order to deposit his sperm in or near a vagina or sample cup. A woman merely has to be present and ovulating within a time crime of about 5 days. She does not have to actively participate. She can, in fact, actively resist and still be impregnated. She does not need to feel any pleasure or experience orgasm. On the other hand, ejaculation is almost always accompanied by pleasure and release of orgasm.

Ovum and egg must meet in the right environment, at the correct time, in order to fuse and create a zygote which then travels through the Fallopian tube where it may or may not implant in the lining of the uterus.

The man’s efforts/contribution/biological expenditure is sometimes at the point of ejaculation. His body expends no more energy or resources to support the pregnancy. If the fertilized egg implants in the Fallopian tube instead of the uterus, neither his life nor his fertility are at risk. He will not undergo any of the many physiological changes that a woman’s body undergoes during pregnancy, childbirth or the postpartum period. He does not lose his job or nor is his career interrupted. He doesn’t even need new pants or shoes. He doesn’t risk death or disability. He’s simply free to go about his life, however he chooses to live it. There are zero laws or Supreme Court rulings that dictate a single moment of his life as a result of his orgasm.

Of course men and boys can be raped, usually by other men and boys but sometimes by women as well.

Rape is always despicable and wrong, whether it is forcible or statutory., whether the victim is male or female; whether the perpetrator is male or female.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

That's a risk she chose to take.
How? By being female? Because that choice was made by her dad, not her.
My goodness no wonder women are afraid of the patriarchy. Men can decide the sex of their children!
You weren’t aware? I should note that men cannot choose which sperm fertilizes an ovum, one with an X or a Y chromosome. But the male does determine the sex of the baby.
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,706
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Please quit trying to tell me what I think or want. You’re wrong and it’s even more embarrassing towards you than it is condescending towards me.

You’re mostly boring with your repetitive sloganeering. I can’t think what pleasure you get from posting the same crap page after page. Just another sermon. You behave like a chatbot, just interjecting yourself into a long settled point with a “but rape”. Put some effort into it, lazy bones.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Please quit trying to tell me what I think or want. You’re wrong and it’s even more embarrassing towards you than it is condescending towards me.

You’re mostly boring with your repetitive sloganeering. I can’t think what pleasure you get from posting the same crap page after page. Just another sermon. You behave like a chatbot, just interjecting yourself into a long settled point with a “but rape”. Put some effort into it, lazy bones.
OTOH, you’ve offered nothing but ignorance and misogyny. As far as I can tell, no one is twisting your arm to deliver bon mots with which to enlighten us all.
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,706
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Please quit trying to tell me what I think or want. You’re wrong and it’s even more embarrassing towards you than it is condescending towards me.

You’re mostly boring with your repetitive sloganeering. I can’t think what pleasure you get from posting the same crap page after page. Just another sermon. You behave like a chatbot, just interjecting yourself into a long settled point with a “but rape”. Put some effort into it, lazy bones.
OTOH, you’ve offered nothing but ignorance and misogyny.
No I have not. All you have offered is “but rape”. A mantra, not a counter argument.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

That's a risk she chose to take.
How? By being female? Because that choice was made by her dad, not her.
My goodness no wonder women are afraid of the patriarchy. Men can decide the sex of their children!
You weren’t aware? I should note that men cannot choose which sperm fertilizes an ovum, one with an X or a Y chromosome. But the male does determine the sex of the baby.
I was not aware that men could choose the sex of their children, no, and I am still not aware of any such thing, because aside from selective sex-based abortion (yes it seems humans do have a sex even before they're born), or selective IVF, no man can choose the sex of his children.

But I see you've walked back your claim, which is good, because the claim was ludicrous. Now you are merely claiming that the small motile gamete determines what sex the fertilised egg will become, which is true and trivial to point out.

Toni, you appear quite desperate in your attempts to strip all agency from women with respect to the necessary but not sufficient role they play in conception. It will not work, except to the people who already think exactly like you.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov

Some want to equate ejaculation with ovulation when those are not analogous.
Toni, nobody has equated them. YOU made the false analogy. It is ridiculous to compare ejaculation with ovulation, and then declare ejaculation as the voluntary act in order to make some point about men's role in conception.

If you want to compare the involuntary acts that are necessary for conception, they include the production of ova in women and the production of sperm in men. Both involuntary.

If you want to compare the voluntary acts that are necessary for conception, they include a man consenting to ejaculate in a woman's vagina, and a woman consenting to a man ejaculating in her vagina.

But I don't think you want to do that. You appear to want to make a causative beginning for conception with ejaculation and make a point of its 'voluntariness'. You also claim you are not interested in assigning 'blame', but it seems that's exactly what you are trying to do.

Men and women are equal causative agents in conception, biologically speaking and ethically speaking.*

*When the activity is consensual.

Men’s bodies produce sperm on an ongoing basis from puberty onward, with production falling off as the man ages. Women are born with their entire lifetime’s supply of ova already present.
Right. So what?
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

That's a risk she chose to take.
So? That's like dismissing the death of a pedestrian who is killed by a drunk driver while crossing the street with the light and in a crosswalk with "That's the risk they choose to take."
How is it like that in any conceivable sense? It isn't. A drunk driver is at fault for killing the pedestrian (presumably). The drunk driver and the pedestrian did not collude in a voluntary game of 'let's see if you can kill me'.

But unless all penis-in-vagina sex is rape (I know it sounds like satire to say it but such an utterance has passed the lips of a feminist before today), then the actors who volunteered in the penis-in-vagina sex are both equally causative - and equally culpable. Saying "a woman does not consent to pregnancy" just because she has penis-in-vagina sex is true, but it's trivial. She consented to actions that could lead to pregnancy, and she is biologically and ethically as responsible for the pregnancy as the man.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all

Some want to equate ejaculation with ovulation when those are not analogous.
Toni, nobody has equated them. YOU made the false analogy. It is ridiculous to compare ejaculation with ovulation, and then declare ejaculation as the voluntary act in order to make some point about men's role in conception.

If you want to compare the involuntary acts that are necessary for conception, they include the production of ova in women and the production of sperm in men. Both involuntary.

If you want to compare the voluntary acts that are necessary for conception, they include a man consenting to ejaculate in a woman's vagina, and a woman consenting to a man ejaculating in her vagina.

But I don't think you want to do that. You appear to want to make a causative beginning for conception with ejaculation and make a point of its 'voluntariness'. You also claim you are not interested in assigning 'blame', but it seems that's exactly what you are trying to do.

Men and women are equal causative agents in conception, biologically speaking and ethically speaking.*

*When the activity is consensual.

Men’s bodies produce sperm on an ongoing basis from puberty onward, with production falling off as the man ages. Women are born with their entire lifetime’s supply of ova already present.
Right. So what?
Absolutely that's not true. Loren in particular has repeatedly equated ovulation with ejaculation.

Thank you for repeating what I've written before: ova and sperm production are analogous.

OTOH, ejaculation is almost always voluntary and the result of voluntary action on the part of the man. Women, OTOH, do not have to agree to penetration, vaginal penetration or ejaculation without the use of a condom in order to conceive. They are NOT analogous nor are they equal.

In the context of an intimate relationship, it's far more likely that they are both consenting to the possibility of a pregnancy and perhaps have even discussed their potential reactions should whatever birth control they chose fail for whatever reason.

But lots of people have sex outside the boundaries of an established intimate relationship. It is not very likely that he has considered the possibility of a pregnancy aside, perhaps, that of course she'd have an abortion and it's not his problem anyway. She might have considered it and might or might not assume that he will use a condom, use a condom correctly, there will be no 'mistakes' or 'accidents.' They both might assume that they know what they will do if there is an accidental pregnancy. The reality of a pregnancy might awake different emotions in either or both: One might find themselves happy at the idea or guilty at the idea of an abortion, horrified, a whole spectrum of emotions. But honestly, most such cases involve sufficient passion and sometimes, sufficient intoxicants that neither is thinking very much at the time. This lack of foresight is mutual.

Unless it's not. In the case of rape, it certainly is not mutual. If she claims she's using birth control and is not: it's not mutual consent. If he promises to use a condom and does not: it's not mutual consent. If either is mostly using whatever birth control they say they are but make a mistake or use it haphazardly or incorrectly---all of which is much, much, much more likely to occur if they are young. Or if a pill is missed or if she's on certain medications that interfere with the effectiveness of the pill--which she might not be aware of! Nor may she realize she missed a pill. He may well intend to use a condom; he may well intend to pull out in time (which isn't 100% effective as was pointed out earlier). She has very little to zero control after penetration as to whether or not he pulls out in time, has used a condom. She may not be expecting to be penetrated when he penetrates her. All sorts of things go wrong. Young people! Which correlates to the exact time in their lives when both are most likely at the peak of their fertility. But can happen at any time in one's life.

It is indeed heartening to see so many men step up and say that they are equally responsible for any pregnancy. They aren't, really. At least not all the time. Either can lie. Either can fail to keep a promise. Either can be raped but it is almost always the woman who is the victim of sexual aggression.

Men in this thread are saying she should just keep her knees together. Well, he should just keep his dick in his pants.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all

Some want to equate ejaculation with ovulation when those are not analogous.
Toni, nobody has equated them. YOU made the false analogy. It is ridiculous to compare ejaculation with ovulation, and then declare ejaculation as the voluntary act in order to make some point about men's role in conception.

If you want to compare the involuntary acts that are necessary for conception, they include the production of ova in women and the production of sperm in men. Both involuntary.

If you want to compare the voluntary acts that are necessary for conception, they include a man consenting to ejaculate in a woman's vagina, and a woman consenting to a man ejaculating in her vagina.

But I don't think you want to do that. You appear to want to make a causative beginning for conception with ejaculation and make a point of its 'voluntariness'. You also claim you are not interested in assigning 'blame', but it seems that's exactly what you are trying to do.

Men and women are equal causative agents in conception, biologically speaking and ethically speaking.*

*When the activity is consensual.

Men’s bodies produce sperm on an ongoing basis from puberty onward, with production falling off as the man ages. Women are born with their entire lifetime’s supply of ova already present.
Right. So what?
No, I compared/contrasted the two events, one of which is voluntary and one of which is not.

They are not equal, as I have stated
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

That's a risk she chose to take.
How? By being female? Because that choice was made by her dad, not her.
My goodness no wonder women are afraid of the patriarchy. Men can decide the sex of their children!
You weren’t aware? I should note that men cannot choose which sperm fertilizes an ovum, one with an X or a Y chromosome. But the male does determine the sex of the baby.
I was not aware that men could choose the sex of their children, no, and I am still not aware of any such thing, because aside from selective sex-based abortion (yes it seems humans do have a sex even before they're born), or selective IVF, no man can choose the sex of his children.

But I see you've walked back your claim, which is good, because the claim was ludicrous. Now you are merely claiming that the small motile gamete determines what sex the fertilised egg will become, which is true and trivial to point out.

Toni, you appear quite desperate in your attempts to strip all agency from women with respect to the necessary but not sufficient role they play in conception. It will not work, except to the people who already think exactly like you.
It's the only thing I actually claimed. The father determines the sex of the baby. I just did not go into details. Honestly, I cannot win. Some get very upset if I make broad statements; others get upset if I go into detail. I mean, some were complaining about the frequency with which I used the word ejaculate or ejaculation.

Men get so emotional about these things.
 

Metaphor

Adult human male
Warning Level 3
Warning Level 2
Warning Level 1
Joined
Apr 1, 2007
Messages
11,299
Gender
None. on/ga/njegov
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

That's a risk she chose to take.
How? By being female? Because that choice was made by her dad, not her.
My goodness no wonder women are afraid of the patriarchy. Men can decide the sex of their children!
You weren’t aware? I should note that men cannot choose which sperm fertilizes an ovum, one with an X or a Y chromosome. But the male does determine the sex of the baby.
I was not aware that men could choose the sex of their children, no, and I am still not aware of any such thing, because aside from selective sex-based abortion (yes it seems humans do have a sex even before they're born), or selective IVF, no man can choose the sex of his children.

But I see you've walked back your claim, which is good, because the claim was ludicrous. Now you are merely claiming that the small motile gamete determines what sex the fertilised egg will become, which is true and trivial to point out.

Toni, you appear quite desperate in your attempts to strip all agency from women with respect to the necessary but not sufficient role they play in conception. It will not work, except to the people who already think exactly like you.
It's the only thing I actually claimed. The father determines the sex of the baby. I just did not go into details. Honestly, I cannot win. Some get very upset if I make broad statements; others get upset if I go into detail. I mean, some were complaining about the frequency with which I used the word ejaculate or ejaculation.

Men get so emotional about these things.
You said being female was "a choice made [for her] by her dad". There was no 'choice' involved on anybody's part. Men do not choose the sex of their children.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

That's a risk she chose to take.
How? By being female? Because that choice was made by her dad, not her.
My goodness no wonder women are afraid of the patriarchy. Men can decide the sex of their children!
You weren’t aware? I should note that men cannot choose which sperm fertilizes an ovum, one with an X or a Y chromosome. But the male does determine the sex of the baby.
I was not aware that men could choose the sex of their children, no, and I am still not aware of any such thing, because aside from selective sex-based abortion (yes it seems humans do have a sex even before they're born), or selective IVF, no man can choose the sex of his children.

But I see you've walked back your claim, which is good, because the claim was ludicrous. Now you are merely claiming that the small motile gamete determines what sex the fertilised egg will become, which is true and trivial to point out.

Toni, you appear quite desperate in your attempts to strip all agency from women with respect to the necessary but not sufficient role they play in conception. It will not work, except to the people who already think exactly like you.
It's the only thing I actually claimed. The father determines the sex of the baby. I just did not go into details. Honestly, I cannot win. Some get very upset if I make broad statements; others get upset if I go into detail. I mean, some were complaining about the frequency with which I used the word ejaculate or ejaculation.

Men get so emotional about these things.
You said being female was "a choice made [for her] by her dad". There was no 'choice' involved on anybody's part. Men do not choose the sex of their children.
My apologies: A better word would have been determined. In human reproduction, sex is determined by the father.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,722
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
No: I wrote that receiving ejaculate into your vagina means you are taking on the risk of becoming pregnant.
There are a LOT of situations where a woman may end up having ejaculate in her vagina without having consented to it. They run tha gamut from forcible rape to "oops I lost control and didn't pull out in time".

That's a risk she chose to take.
How? By being female? Because that choice was made by her dad, not her.
By choosing to use withdrawl as contraception. Sometimes the guy doesn't pull out on time.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,722
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Absolutely that's not true. Loren in particular has repeatedly equated ovulation with ejaculation.

I simply flipped your argument. I was showing the problem with your argument, not actually arguing that ovulation is the cause.

OTOH, ejaculation is almost always voluntary and the result of voluntary action on the part of the man. Women, OTOH, do not have to agree to penetration, vaginal penetration or ejaculation without the use of a condom in order to conceive. They are NOT analogous nor are they equal.

We are talking about consensual sex, not rape. Rape pregnancy is 100% the man's fault, nobody except some delusional QOPers are denying that.
 

Loren Pechtel

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 16, 2000
Messages
36,722
Location
Nevada
Gender
Yes
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
You said being female was "a choice made [for her] by her dad". There was no 'choice' involved on anybody's part. Men do not choose the sex of their children.
While they can't choose the sex they can fiddle with the dice, making it substantially off from 50:50. Woman comes first, man ejaculates deep favors boys, woman doesn't come, man ejaculates very shallow favors girls. I suspect timing compared to ovulation also would be a factor but I've never seen it addressed. (Basically, all of this comes down to the fact that Y sperm tend to be faster but X sperm have more endurance. Make conception easier and the Y is more likely to win the race, make conception harder and the Y is more likely to have fallen by the wayside, the X winning by default.)
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Absolutely that's not true. Loren in particular has repeatedly equated ovulation with ejaculation.

I simply flipped your argument. I was showing the problem with your argument, not actually arguing that ovulation is the cause.
[/QUOTE]

No, you were attempting to equate two things which are not equivalent. My argument and reasoning are sound. Yours is flawed.

OTOH, ejaculation is almost always voluntary and the result of voluntary action on the part of the man. Women, OTOH, do not have to agree to penetration, vaginal penetration or ejaculation without the use of a condom in order to conceive. They are NOT analogous nor are they equal.

We are talking about consensual sex, not rape. Rape pregnancy is 100% the man's fault, nobody except some delusional QOPers are denying that.
YOU were talking about consensual sex. I was talking about pregnancy, period. I realize that men prefer not to think about rape at all and for the most part, they don't need to. However, women DO need to think about rape throughout their lives. Indeed, many cannot ever forget about rape for a second because they are survivors of rape or sexual assault.

It is very telling that repeatedly men are attempting to define the conversation along lines that suit them. I (inadvertently) started this thread and I get to define how I want the conversation to go.

Without ejaculation, there would be very few (or no) pregnancies.
Ovulation and spermatogenesis are analogous.
Ovulation and ejaculation are NOT analogous. The first is under autonomic control. The second normally occurs as a matter of choice.

My initial statement and every post in this thread has been all inclusive with regards to ejaculation being necessary for all pregnancies. Metaphor pointed out that sperm might be obtained otherwise as happened with his brother. I'm not questioning Metaphor on an event that he knows much more about than I do but I am much more familiar with the practice of inducing ejaculation in a comatose patient for the purposes of semen retrieval for a spouse who wishes to carry their child. This isn't surgical procedure. I'm not going into details because it really does tend to make most people squirm. It's not much different than when they induce livestock to ejaculate, collect the semen and use it to selectively impregnate suitable female livestock. I'll leave it there, with apologies all around for any discomfort.
 

TomC

Celestial Highness
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
4,643
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
It is very telling that repeatedly men are attempting to define the conversation along lines that suit them.
You mean like when people point out that most pregnancies result from consensual sex, and you change the subject to rape?

Or when people point out that women have agency, and can make choices before having sex, and you respond with "Every pregnancy is the result of a man ejaculating!"?

Yeah, right.
It's "men are attempting to define the conversation along lines that suit them." that's the problem with this issue.

How feminist.
Tom
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
It is very telling that repeatedly men are attempting to define the conversation along lines that suit them.
You mean like when people point out that most pregnancies result from consensual sex, and you change the subject to rape?

Or when people point out that women have agency, and can make choices before having sex, and you respond with "Every pregnancy is the result of a man ejaculating!"?

Yeah, right.
It's "men are attempting to define the conversation along lines that suit them." that's the problem with this issue.

How feminist.
Tom
No, not at all.

When men want to avoid talking about all pregnancies, not just the ones they wish to acknowledge. The way that men in this thread have attempted to tell me I'm not discussing things correctly when actually I started this conversation.

Men attempting to define conversations along lines that suit them and silence conversation that makes them uncomfortable. Indeed, that is a problem.

You are not compelled to participate. I'm not compelled to post only what you feel is acceptable.
 

TomC

Celestial Highness
Joined
Oct 1, 2020
Messages
4,643
Location
Midwestern USA
Gender
Faggot
Basic Beliefs
Agnostic deist
When men want to avoid talking about all pregnancies, not just the ones they wish to acknowledge.
Who do think you're kidding?
With your gender bigoted "men"?

Most of us, including all the men as I recall, are talking about all pregnancies. It's people like you who keep changing the subject. It's like you don't think that women are capable of making a bad decision, so you insist that irresponsible sexual choices are necessarily the result of men making choices. You've done that over and over.
Tom
 

laughing dog

Contributor
Joined
Dec 29, 2004
Messages
21,356
Location
Minnesota
Gender
IT
Basic Beliefs
Dogs rule
When men want to avoid talking about all pregnancies, not just the ones they wish to acknowledge.
Who do think you're kidding?
With your gender bigoted "men"?
Can you explain how accurately refering to male posters is “gender bigoted”?
TomC said:
Most of us, including all the men as I recall, are talking about all pregnancies…so you insist that irresponsible are necessarily the fault of men.
Your recall snd reading comprehension are faulty. There is st least one poster who narrowly defines voluntary sex to exclude lies ir mistakes. Moreover, Toni has explained multiple times her point is that the usual onus to orevent the pregnancy is on the woman and the role if the male is minimized.
 

TSwizzle

Let's Go Brandon!
Joined
Jan 8, 2015
Messages
6,706
Location
West Hollywood
Gender
Male
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
Men attempting to define conversations along lines that suit them and silence conversation that makes them uncomfortable. Indeed, that is a problem.

You are not compelled to participate. I'm not compelled to post only what you feel is acceptable
You are entertaining in the same way that when one receives a call about how your social security number has been suspended. An interlude to one’s dreary work day where one can see how long you can keep the caller on the line. Who will cave first.? You’ve circled so many times you must be dizzy.

Women get pregnant because they have sex, mostly. Men get women pregnant because they have sex with them.
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
When men want to avoid talking about all pregnancies, not just the ones they wish to acknowledge.
Who do think you're kidding?
With your gender bigoted "men"?

Most of us, including all the men as I recall, are talking about all pregnancies. It's people like you who keep changing the subject. It's like you don't think that women are capable of making a bad decision, so you insist that irresponsible sexual choices are necessarily the result of men making choices. You've done that over and over.
Tom
May I remind you that I started the thread. Men in this thread have repeatedly insisted that they were talking about pregnancies which occur through consensual sex and I’ve been thoroughly castigated for mentioning rape.

Here’s the thing:

ALL pregnancies occur because some man ejaculated. He may have ejacukated in or near a vagina. He may have ejacukated into a sample cup. But that’s how pregnancies happen: pregnancies that occur through consensual sex, through in vitro, and through rape.

Pregnancies that occur through rape happen just the same way pregnancies happen with living married couples: the man ejaculates in or near the woman’s vagina during the window of time that she is fertile.

It’s the same process whether the pregnancy is a longed for event, inconvenient t, unwanted or as a result of rape
 

Toni

Contributor
Joined
Aug 11, 2011
Messages
15,619
Location
NOT laying back and thinking of England
Basic Beliefs
Peace on Earth, goodwill towards all
Men attempting to define conversations along lines that suit them and silence conversation that makes them uncomfortable. Indeed, that is a problem.

You are not compelled to participate. I'm not compelled to post only what you feel is acceptable
You are entertaining in the same way that when one receives a call about how your social security number has been suspended. An interlude to one’s dreary work day where one can see how long you can keep the caller on the line. Who will cave first.? You’ve circled so many times you must be dizzy.

Women get pregnant because they have sex, mostly. Men get women pregnant because they have sex with them.
You’re not obligated to read or respond to anything I write.

Your responses have ceased to be responses and now are only excuses to insult and harass me.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom