A penis is like a basketball player - it always dribbles before it shoots.
I know mine leaks like a sonofabitch about ten-fifteen minutes into the act.
My high school sex ed teacher, who was about 60 and looked very grandfatherly, said the same thing.
Big, Big, Caveat- I say all this out of genuine curiosity and not to endorse or encourage risky behaviors.
With all due respect to any medical or healthcare professionals who may have previously posted to this thread, I wonder if someone could post a cite that documents the likelihood of a woman becoming pregnant strictly from pre-ejaculate? After all, It is one thing to say that the withdrawl method has a “failure rate” of X, another to document the reason why the method “failed”.
I was under the impression that a man with proper control stands very little chance of impregnating a woman if the penis is retracted prior to ejaculation.
IIRC, The main source of pre-ejaculate, or “pre-come” is the Cowper’s gland, which produces an alkaline fluid that is supposed to buffer the urethra and does not have any direct source of sperm cells.
If the man urinates one or more times prior to intercourse, there are likely relatively few viable sperm cells in the urethra to begin with.
Again, IIRC, the urethra’s junction with the Cowper’s gland is inferior to the junction with the seminal vesicles, I just don’t see how the pre-ejaculate can be “rich in sperm cells” as reported in the link Lsura provided (below)
Any cites or MDs or health professionals that have the straight dope on sperm cell densities in pre-ejaculate fluid?
For the record, by the way, the only method of birth control condoned by the Roman Catholic Church is “Natural Family Planning”, which is a variant on the rhythm method with temperature readings and the like added to help predict ovulation. The Church does not promote use of the withdrawal method. Whether this is because of moral objections or because of the dismal success rate of that method, I don’t know.
And as it’s recently been shown that (some) women ovulate more than once a month, presumably that method is just as worthless.
http://archive.newscientist.com/secure/article/article.jsp?rp=1&id=mg17924041.600
You have to be a new Scientist subscriber to view above link, but for example “During the six weeks, 50 [of the 63] women ovulated once, as expected, and seven did not ovulate at all. But the most surprising finding was that six ovulated twice in the space of a month, on two separate days.”.
I just did a google search for “coitus interruptus” and hardly any of what I read was consistent. One link said it can cause sexual dysfunction in the male after using it for an extended period of time, other sites claimed there are no health risks at all. One site said 60% failure rate (but is that from pre-ejaculate fluid only or from an “oops–didn’t pull out quick enough”?) and another site had a different statistic altogether.
Like Stan Doubt I would also like to know how many woman are getting pregnant from pre-ejaculate “dew” (as it’s been referred to). Some sites I went to warned that the male ejaculating anywhere near the vagina could result in pregnancy, and that women doing this are advised to “wash thoroughly” immediately after intercourse. I wonder what the the chances of non-deposited sperm actually entering the vagina and fertilizing an egg are?
I don’t know what the chances are, but that’s where my one and a half year old girl came from. My wife and I are both healthy people aged 25 and we have been having unprotected sex for about a 2 years and have just the one to show for it. We normally have sex daily so that’s about 1/650-700
He’s going to be raising two kids…and doesn’t know his penis leaks? Doesn’t know the rhythm method isn’t working?
Oh brother.
Stan, it would be difficult to give statistics on how many pregnancies result from the pre-orgasmic semen leakage because all the data would have to be derived from reporting from the patients (which frankly in this area would be very unreliable). I don’t think anyone is volunteering to be monitored and cammed to see whether non-orgasmic (from the male point of view) intercourse is truly occuring or not.
Likewise statistics on the presence or absence of sperm in the pre-ejaculate secretions: No widespread studies have been done to see how recently an actual ejaculation was necessary to have sperm present in the secretions; likewise how many bladder voidings were needed to ‘clean out’ said sperm.
Nor do we have good data on just how many men really do have ‘good control’.
But we do have incidental data that shows significant concentration of sperm in some samples of pre-ejaculate, present in large enough numbers to be believed capable of causing conception. We also have data that shows that the withdrawal method is poorly effective as a means of contraception.
So I frankly feel it is quite legitimate at this point to recommend against said method, without feeling the need to try to exactly quantify the risks per incident per specific user.
QtM, MD