HOME | DD
Not-Think β Pregnancy
Published: 2011-03-18 20:53:24 +0000 UTC; Views: 3907; Favourites: 160; Downloads: 15
Redirect to original
Description
Want a sure fire way to stop that pesky foetus from forming? The answer is here! It's more effective than condoms, more foolproof than control!Related content
Comments: 177
Way to take a joke seriously
π: 0 β©: 1
Aw man, I was hoping you'd go "Hahaha, Feverall".
π: 0 β©: 1
If "don't want to get pregnant -don't heve sex", then "don't want to die -don't live"?
π: 0 β©: 2
"If "don't want to get pregnant -don't heve sex", then "don't want to die -don't live"?"
This is a false analogy. Everyone can choose not to have sex. No one can choose not to live. That's an impossibility.
π: 0 β©: 1
People can have sex without getting pregnant. Some even can't GET pregnant despite having sex. Some vant to get pregnant, but don't want to have sex.
Most of the population has or will have sex in their lives, even some asexual people. You can't expect them not to have sex if they don't want to have children. They sould expect easy access to birth control, which exists and helps people to have sex without pregnancy as a result.Β
Speaking of choosing not to live... every year many people decide not to live and commit suicide. Often because of unwanted prenancy.
π: 0 β©: 1
"You can't expect them not to have sex if they don't want to have children."
Yes, actually, I can. I'm quite capable of having the expectation, and people are quite capable of living up to that expectation if they so choose. They simply choose not to, for a variety of reasons.
"Speaking of choosing not to live... every year many people decide not to live and commit suicide. Often because of unwanted prenancy."
No, they are choosing to die, not choosing "not to live." You can only choose not to live before you're alive. Which is an impossibility.
And... no. Obviously you're unaware of the true correlations with suicide. It's never, ever just because of an unwanted pregnancy. Nice try, but randomly claiming things won't work - especially against those of us who are more educated on the subject.
π: 0 β©: 1
No, actually, because it is other person's life and it doesn't, really doesn't, affect your own. Those people can expect YOU not to have any expectations towards them, right? Don't say they can't, if you can, why not them?
Unwanted pregnancy that can cost them their job, a place to live -which can happen if a pregnant person is teenage and their family won't accept their pregnancy- which can affect their treatment for either physical or mental illness, cause violent actions from their partner... yeah, it is never a reason of a suicide, yeah, right.Β
To die is to not live anymore, isn't it?Β
π: 0 β©: 1
"No, actually, because it is other person's life and it doesn't, really doesn't, affect your own. Those people can expect YOU not to have any expectations towards them, right? Don't say they can't, if you can, why not them?"
I never said they can't. So you agree that your statement was false.
"Unwanted pregnancy that can cost them their job, a place to live -which can happen if a pregnant person is teenage and their family won't accept their pregnancy- which can affect their treatment for either physical or mental illness, cause violent actions from their partner... yeah, it is never a reason of a suicide, yeah, right."
I never said it wasn't a reason for suicide - I said it's never the sole reason. Try some reading comprehension some time.
"To die is to not live anymore, isn't it?"
Keyword being "anymore." To not live is to never have lived in the first place. Again, for one to wish to not live (never getting to be alive in the first place) is an impossibility.
π: 0 β©: 1
You said you can expect. Why? Does other people's actions -affecting their lives- affect you anyhow? I do not expect people to do anything, you said you do expect them to act in a certain way. Whose statement is false?
How do you know that it isn't a sole reason? Based on own experience? That doesn't apply to all the rest of the humanity, mind that.
Essential part of the problem is "other people and THEIR life". No one is going to force you to anything (like using birth control etc), so why do you think others should be forced to continue their unwanted, often life-wrecking pregnancies against their will, because "you can expect people to act certain way"?
You seem to be very, very oblivious about the idea of being pro choice and about equality, that's kind of sad.Β
π: 0 β©: 1
"You said you can expect. Why? Does other people's actions -affecting their lives- affect you anyhow?"
Someone who asks this question probably has yet to understand how interconnected everything - all creatures and all people - is, and thus, that the actions of one individual affects all others inevitably. To believe otherwise is a comfortable illusion.
"I do not expect people to do anything, you said you do expect them to act in a certain way. Whose statement is false?"
Mine wasn't, that's for sure.
"How do you know that it isn't a sole reason? Based on own experience? That doesn't apply to all the rest of the humanity, mind that."
Based on my studies in psychology and philosophy under two mentors who majored in psychology and who both worked with people who were contemplating suicide and those who survived or chose not to commit suicide. And most other psychologists and social workers.
"Essential part of the problem is "other people and THEIR life". No one is going to force you to anything (like using birth control etc), so why do you think others should be forced to continue their unwanted, often life-wrecking pregnancies against their will, because "you can expect people to act certain way"?"
This doesn't have anything to do with the conversation. I can expect people to use a little common sense and self-restraint. And if the pregnancy is so unwanted and life-wrecking, then they were obviously pretty stupid to have sex in the first place. Which is my point. I don't want to hear any whining from someone who had sex despite knowing that they would not be able to accommodate any child that would be conceived from their actions. That's irresponsible, irrational, etc. You may not do whatever you want with no consequences.
Hence why abstinence is the best method of birth control, to avoid the unwanted, "often life-pregnancies." If they still have sex, regardless of what measures they use to avoid pregnancy, yet still get pregnant, and they don't want the pregnancy, that doesn't change that it's still their own fault for making that choice to begin with.
"You seem to be very, very oblivious about the idea of being pro choice and about equality, that's kind of sad."
I don't see how this has anything to do with the conversation. But since you obviously are losing the main arguments we were to be addressing, it's only natural you would try to push the attention on to other, irrelevant topics.
π: 0 β©: 1
No, someone who asks this question simply thinks that expecting others to act in a certain way and claiming to be entitlet to expect (for no apparent reason in fact) is kind of arrogant. You're not a supernatural being (me neither, but I don't expect ANYTHING from others, it'd be rude) to tell others what to do or not to do because you can and you say so -especially in a very private area of sexual life and procreation.Β
As I said before: it does not, I repeat, DOES NOT apply to everyone on a planet. You met a very small group of people living on earth (like all of us; we don't know absolutely everyone, it's impossible) and you have absolutely no idea if there arere, or not, people that would act in exactly opposite way that you are used to. Your experience =/= all posible experiences of all people. Simple.Β
Okay, so if we have here a hypothetical couple, and they're married, it is said that a partner has a "marital duty" to please the other BY HAVING SEX WITH THEM. But!, if they don't want to have kids, they are expected to abstain, which leads to not meeting up the "marital duty". So what should they do, divorce? They love eachother and care for eachother and want to stay together. Why can't they simply make love to eachother without the risk of pregnancy they don't want (for any reason: not wanting kids, not having stable job/salaries good enough, health issues... as many people, as many reasons)? Because some stranger says so and expects them to obey (for what?)?
Abstinence is not good for everyone. The observation method is not good for everyone. The pill is not good for everyone. Condoms are not good for everyone. Eating peanuts is not good for everyone. Don't force your choices on others, you have no right to do so.
I simply conclude from your statements. Didn't know it is equal to losing. Funny. Well, we learn for all our lives.Β
Β
I do not expect you to change your views on this (as I said, expecting people to do as I wish would be arrogant, so I won't), I only wish (not really hoping for it to be fullfilled, who am I to tell others what to do) you would try to acknowledge and understand this point of view.Β
I hope you'll have a nice holiday, no matter how you're going to spend it.
π: 0 β©: 1
"No, someone who asks this question simply thinks that expecting others to act in a certain way and claiming to be entitlet to expect (for no apparent reason in fact) is kind of arrogant. You're not a supernatural being (me neither, but I don't expect ANYTHING from others, it'd be rude) to tell others what to do or not to do because you can and you say so -especially in a very private area of sexual life and procreation."
...this makes no sense whatsoever.
"As I said before: it does not, I repeat, DOES NOT apply to everyone on a planet. You met a very small group of people living on earth (like all of us; we don't know absolutely everyone, it's impossible) and you have absolutely no idea if there arere, or not, people that would act in exactly opposite way that you are used to. Your experience =/= all posible experiences of all people. Simple."
So you admit that you fail to understand how science works. I'm not surprised.
"Okay, so if we have here a hypothetical couple, and they're married, it is said that a partner has a "marital duty" to please the other BY HAVING SEX WITH THEM. But!, if they don't want to have kids, they are expected to abstain, which leads to not meeting up the "marital duty"." So what should they do, divorce?"
They shouldn't have gotten married in the first place. I'm surprised they would be so stupid as to get married before they even talked about whether or not they want kids. Things like this are kind of important. But if they're already married, then they can abstain and that be it. Last I checked, it's not a law that they have to have sex anyway.
"They love eachother and care for eachother and want to stay together. Why can't they simply make love to eachother without the risk of pregnancy they don't want (for any reason: not wanting kids, not having stable job/salaries good enough, health issues... as many people, as many reasons)? Because some stranger says so and expects them to obey (for what?)?"
I'm not telling them what they have to do. I can expect them to use their brains and be responsible. You know, use their brains? If they can't afford to get pregnant, or don't want to get pregnant, the best way to ensure they don't get pregnant is to abstain. Simple.
"Abstinence is not good for everyone. The observation method is not good for everyone. The pill is not good for everyone. Condoms are not good for everyone. Eating peanuts is not good for everyone. Don't force your choices on others, you have no right to do so."
False, abstinence is in fact good for everyone. It means no unwanted pregnancies and no STDs. While ALL other things that you listed do NOT mean no unwanted pregnancies and no STDs. I'm not forcing my choices on others - I'm just expecting people to do the smart thing if they don't want babies or STDs. If they don't abstain, and they get an STD or an unwanted pregnancy, then it's their own fault.
"I simply conclude from your statements. Didn't know it is equal to losing. Funny. Well, we learn for all our lives."
No, you didn't "simply conclude from your statements." Your pushing the conversation somewhere it doesn't belong.
"I do not expect you to change your views on this (as I said, expecting people to do as I wish would be arrogant, so I won't), I only wish (not really hoping for it to be fullfilled, who am I to tell others what to do) you would try to acknowledge and understand this point of view."
I would acknowledge and understand it if it were logical. It is not logical to do things that could risk getting oneself harmed when they do not wish to be harmed, or risk getting a responsibility that one does not want. It makes no sense to me.
"I hope you'll have a nice holiday, no matter how you're going to spend it."
And you as well.
π: 0 β©: 1
As I said before, you are oblivious. Β
You accuse lack of logic if you don't agree with something.Β
If two people don't want to have children, they can as well get a vasectomy/fallopian tubes tied, which, if performed by a competent surgeon, prevents pregnancy as well as abstaining, plus it can be reversible if needed (higher success rate if reversing a vasectomy, but still). It also couts as using their brains (like using ANY actual birth control methot or combined methods) -only diffirence is that they won't suffer from unfullfilment.Β
Yes, birth control can fail. Life-saving surgeries also can fail. Even surgeries that are not life-saving, but giving life a better quality can fail, it all has it's risk. Treatments have their risk. Should we give it all up because of that risk?
You call people "whining" if they get pregnant and do not want it. Classy. Also, this is one of the reasons why I conclude (and I guess I know better when Im concluding and when not, but as I said: we learn for all our lives) that you are oblivious. You don't even try to acknowledge that other point of view can exist and be perfectly valid for the other side, just as yours is as valid for you. You call it false only because it is opposite. It's not innacurate because it is different. It is just different, that's all.
People can get harmed in so many ways. This year, one woman in my country simply left her house, walked the street and ended up with her spinal cord damaged, because a man trying to commit suicide jumped off the window and fell on her. We never know if the simpliest thing, like walking down the street, getting to the bus, or anything can end for us. Crossing the street can be risky -someone might not stop their car and hit us. Getting to the mall -a fire can start, panicking crowd might trample us. Choking on a cookie. Traveling by plane. But we don't avoid every life situations because being afraid of risk. No one expets us to. Why would it apply to sexual life?Β
π: 0 β©: 1
"You accuse lack of logic if you don't agree with something."
False. I say something is illogical when it is illogical. I bet you don't even know what logic actually is.
"If two people don't want to have children, they can as well get a vasectomy/fallopian tubes tied, which, if performed by a competent surgeon, prevents pregnancy as well as abstaining, plus it can be reversible if needed (higher success rate if reversing a vasectomy, but still)."
See, that's the catch. But even if said surgeon is competent does not 100% promise that the surgery was performed appropriately. Therefore, abstinence is still superior, because there is a 100% guarantee that the woman will not get pregnant, whereas with the surgery, it is not 100% certain (because the certainty of this relies on the certainty of the surgery being performed appropriately, but that certainty rate is not 100%).
"It also couts as using their brains (like using ANY actual birth control methot or combined methods) -only diffirence is that they won't suffer from unfullfilment."
Unless they decide they want to have children. Then they will suffer from an even worse form of "unfullfilment."
"Yes, birth control can fail. Life-saving surgeries also can fail. Even surgeries that are not life-saving, but giving life a better quality can fail, it all has it's risk. Treatments have their risk. Should we give it all up because of that risk?"
This is a fallacy known as a false analogy. Life-saving surgeries are meant to correct something that is /wrong/, as do surgeries. Birth control prevents the beginning of a perfectly natural, healthy process.
But you agree, then, that birth control fails, and therefore, abstinence is still the only method of "birth control" that is 100% effective.
"You call people "whining" if they get pregnant and do not want it. Classy. Also, this is one of the reasons why I conclude (and I guess I know better when Im concluding and when not, but as I said: we learn for all our lives) that you are oblivious."
No. It's not "oblivious." Oblivious means I am not certain of something or don't know something (and if you're going to claim that, I expect proof). But I do know. I'm just insensitive. Or some would call me strict. Or a realist.
"You don't even try to acknowledge that other point of view can exist and be perfectly valid for the other side, just as yours is as valid for you. You call it false only because it is opposite. It's not innacurate because it is different. It is just different, that's all."
I acknowledge other points of view exist. However, that does NOT mean that they are valid. It is illogical - actually, just plain stupid - to believe that all points of view are equally valid just because they exist. Valid is a term in logic. I bet you don't even know what "valid" actually means.
And again, wrong. I call it false because it's false, and inaccurate when it's inaccurate. It is a FACT that abstinence is the only 100% effective way to prevent STDs and birth control. That is a /fact/ and you have not only failed to refute it, you also agree. It IS the only 100% effective way. No amount of whining about me not "acknowledging other points of view" will change these facts.
"People can get harmed in so many ways. This year, one woman in my country simply left her house, walked the street and ended up with her spinal cord damaged, because a man trying to commit suicide jumped off the window and fell on her. We never know if the simpliest thing, like walking down the street, getting to the bus, or anything can end for us. Crossing the street can be risky -someone might not stop their car and hit us. Getting to the mall -a fire can start, panicking crowd might trample us. Choking on a cookie. Traveling by plane. But we don't avoid every life situations because being afraid of risk. No one expets us to. Why would it apply to sexual life?"
False analogy fallacy. Again. Sexual activity CAUSES pregnancy. A woman walking down the street does /not/ cause a guy to jump to his death and crush her. Nor down crossing the street CAUSE a car to hit a person. Nor does going to a mall CAUSE a fire to start or a crowd to trample. Nor does eating a cookie CAUSE the choking. Etc.
Further, the analogies also don't work because leaving one's house, and all those other activities are required for daily life. Sex is not required for daily life.
π: 0 β©: 1
*sigh*
All your statements can be sumed up in a quote: "Mine is the right and it is a sacred right. Because even if it is your, then mine is miner than yours. Because my right is the minest!" (Moja jest tylko racja i to ΕwiΔta racja. Bo nawet jak jest twoja, to moja jest mojsza niΕΌ twojsza. Ε»e wΕaΕnie moja racja jest racja najmojsza!, Polish movie "DzieΕ Εwira")*
*it is written incorrectly on purpose, it is used in original version to emphasize Β the idea.
No, being a realist doesn't require contempt for people's choices different for own. It requires, well acknowledging that different choices exist, that's all. Insensitive is way more suiting. Or insensitive and condemning. And disrespectful. And arrogant.Β
The point I made id that we potentially risk our safety, sometimes even lives, everytime we leave our homes and decide to even walk the streets, thus we risk even in small cases. Bt still, we risk. That's the point.
I don't see the point of proceeding this discussion. You won't acknowledge (and thus understand and respect) any point of view diferent from yours, you are right and you're the rightest and trying to break through a wall of self-righteous bricks makes no sense at all.
Again, have a nice holiday happy New Year and of course good fun on New Year's Eve. Hope you'll see some amazing fireworks.
π: 0 β©: 1
"All your statements can be sumed up in a quote: "Mine is the right and it is a sacred right. Because even if it is your, then mine is miner than yours. Because my right is the minest!""
No, that does not sum the information up at all. This is a mere (and pathetic) attempt to describe the meaning. If you can't or are unwilling to actually address when I state, then at least be honest and say so.
"No, being a realist doesn't require contempt for people's choices different for own."
Who said I have contempt for people's choices different from my own? I don't have contempt for people. I do have contempt for /some/ choices, but certainly not just because they are different.
"It requires, well acknowledging that different choices exist, that's all."
I have never talked about different choices. All I've been talking about is the BEST choice when wants to avoid a certain outcome. You have yet to refute this.
"Insensitive is way more suiting. Or insensitive and condemning. And disrespectful. And arrogant."
And I really don't care what subjective terms you choose to describe it as. Those don't matter, they're not refutations of what I stated, nor are they arguments.
"The point I made id that we potentially risk our safety, sometimes even lives, everytime we leave our homes and decide to even walk the streets, thus we risk even in small cases. Bt still, we risk. That's the point."
But that is irrelevant to the discussion, so...
"I don't see the point of proceeding this discussion. You won't acknowledge (and thus understand and respect) any point of view diferent from yours, you are right and you're the rightest and trying to break through a wall of self-righteous bricks makes no sense at all."
I have NO respect for anyΒ views different from mine just because they are different. It's beyond idiotic to respect views solely on the basis that they are different. I only respect ideas that are reasonable, logical, AND the person who has them can properly and intelligently explain them. You have not done so.
"Again, have a nice holiday happy New Year and of course good fun on New Year's Eve. Hope you'll see some amazing fireworks."
Meh... we don't get fireworks here. We have to watch them on TV. Fireworks on TV aren't as cool, but I suppose it is better than nothing.
π: 0 β©: 0
Dude you can have fun without having sex! It's not that hard. It's get a dang hobby, read a book, learn to play guitar, just don't have sex! It won't kill you!
π: 0 β©: 1
Sure it can help you with sexual tension, sure. What you said can apply to pretty much everything: going out with friends, playing games... you can have fun without it, but why? If I like it, I do it.
π: 0 β©: 1
I have no problem with RESPONSIBLE people having sex, it's when teenagers who don't even have a job have sex that is stupid to me. To have sex you should be able to handle the possible outcomes both financially and emotionally. I know a few single women who became pregnant after they graduated and had careers to support the kid, I have no problem with this and actually applaud them for raising the kid alone but they can afford it. Anytime a male and a female have sex they are risking the possibility of pregnancy and that is a path teenagers are not ready for!
π: 0 β©: 3
As far as i'm concerned, if you're not ready to be a parent, you're not ready to have sex. End of story.
π: 0 β©: 0
Maybe it's different here in Europe, but we were taught about importance of using condoms when we do it. In fact, someone's sexual life, no matter if teenage or mature, female, male or else -if healthy and consensual- is that person's business, not anyone else.
π: 0 β©: 1
In America most of the teenagers are f*cking stupid (and this is coming from an 18 year old)! We have shows about teen moms like 16 and Pregnant, Teen Moms, Teen Moms 2, Secret Life of the American Teen... The last was a regular show but the first three are reality shows. Not to mention the movie "Pregnancy Pact" based on a true story a few years back about like 15 high school girls making a pact to get pregnant and raise their babies together.
π: 0 β©: 1
Then good that I can live here. Shows of that kind in my country are such absurds that no one would believe in these stories. As long as I live I've met one pregnant girl who left the school and did not come back, but pregnancy was ton a reason -she had really poor grades and no real will to sit in class. We rarely seen her due to her truancy for two years.
π: 0 β©: 1
America has the highest rate of teen pregnancy in te world! In fact some of our schools have nurseries, and most of the kids in them don't belong to teachers. I had a project in 8th grade that I had to care for a robot baby thing, one of the other girls was opted out from taking care of one because she had a real baby to take care of! Then I have two friends who got pregnant their senior year of high school and had sons at the ages of 18 and 19. My younger sister (whose 16) has three friends who are pregnant or are moms already!
π: 0 β©: 1
Pregnancy rate at all is pretty low here where I live. How old are 8th graders, 14? I think it's not an age of consent in US, is it?
π: 0 β©: 1
8th grade 13-14 years old and the age of consent is 18 but if a teen who is under 18 gets pregnant by a guy who is also under 18 it's legal. And another way to beat it is if one of the parents is under 18 and the other over, if they get married it's legal because they're married, even if it is an after fact.
π: 0 β©: 0
Even more fool proof, sterilization.
π: 0 β©: 1
Actually that's not full proof, hun. One of my aunts was conceived after my grandfather was "sterilized" turned out the doctor epically failed...
π: 0 β©: 1
Thats when they fail. When done properly, it cannot happen.
π: 0 β©: 1
There always a chance that it won't be done correctly slim but still there
π: 0 β©: 1
I am aware of that, but I said when its done PROPERLY. If done properly, then that chance is eliminated. If it happens, it was not done properly.
π: 0 β©: 1
As the bible teaches us, even this method has a chance of failing. Hehe.
π: 0 β©: 5
You forgot adultery, Mary cheated on Joseph with God!
π: 0 β©: 0
Supporting and will continue until marriage XDD
π: 0 β©: 1
If I knew how to give you a thumbs up icon, I would
π: 0 β©: 1
π: 0 β©: 0
Hmmm. That's a kind of weird to me. Let's say there is a couple who don't want kinds - should they forget about sex totally??? Nowadays there's a wide variety of contraceptives which give you certainty of not getting pregnant and hence allow you to enjoy sex life. Of course if someone doesn't like sex it's his/her choice and on the other hand if someone wants to sleep with as much partners as he/she wants that's a personal choice. Use condoms, they are available everywhere and they're cheap and they are a very efficient protection against unwanted pregnancy, std, hiv etc. "Don't have sex." - it's too paranoid, too catholic...
π: 0 β©: 1
Once again, my words have been misinterpreted. I said "Best" not "Only". If you had taken the time to read either the artists comments, or the other correspondence you would have seen this. Contraceptives (short anything of getting a historectemy) are not, and never will be 'perfect'. Condoms break, the pill has a 2-30 percent failure rating depending on the name. Life will create life- that is the function it has been designed for. Equally, if someone two people are only 'messing around' and the male ejaculates onto the female, the sperm have the ability to find their way via swimming into the vigina, uterus and eventually fallopian tubes. Seeing as there is yet to be a proven case of parthenogenesis in humans, the only 100 percent fail safe way to not get pregnant is to not have sexual encounters contact, be it via actual intercourse or reaching climax through other means.
Indeed, this particular stamp is directed at those people who fuck everything with two legs and a penis, believing that 'it won't happen to me' Something IS going to happen eventually. Be it pregnancy, STDs, heartbreak, rape- statistics state that something will happen.
And no, I do not encourage couples to not have sex on account of not wanting a child. Intercourse is an integral part of a successful relationship. The two people doing the deed should take necessary precautions, and be aware as well and take responsibility.
That, and only that, are what I am stating.
π: 0 β©: 1
Especially for you:
[link]
This is a very informative table about the effectiveness of all methods of contraception including natural ones. There you can see that birth control pill when used perfectly has 99.70% effectiveness. Even pills used 30 years ago didn't have 30% of failure.
One thing in your comment really made me laugh: "the sperm have the ability to find their way via swimming into the vigina, uterus and eventually fallopian tubes." I just imagined the army of spermatozoons swimming across the woman's belly trying to reach the vagina. Impressive. You stumped me. Thanks!
π: 0 β©: 1
Indeed. You notice that on the document is states 'withdrawal' that is what I was I mean by 'swimming'
π: 0 β©: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>