Nah, if people use it typically it’s 15% failure. Perfect use is 2% failure. People are really bad at using stuff.
/edit: Serves me right for tabbing out to double check the percentages. hehe.
And all girls get tubals. NO exceptions.
Last year, out of the blue, my sex partner (we first had sex decades ago) decided we would become “celibate” which actually meant no fucking, orgasms by other methods only. It lasted for a few months and was damn good fun.
Oops, you’re right, I did. Sorry about that. Simple carelessness on my part - I’ve never seen a chart which puts female before male and I didn’t read closely enough!
I disagree with using Perfect Use numbers, though. We’re none of us perfect (see previous paragraph!) Sure, you can try to do things better, but condoms still break and slip. The Pill can be rendered less effective if you’re taking antibiotics or other drugs - some of which may not have been identified yet, or you can get a stomach virus and throw up before it’s absorbed into your system. Contraceptive failure is not always due to people being ignorant or careless.
Because it’s a physical object and physical objects break. They slip. Even if you put it on at the right time with the right method, use the proper amount of the right kind of lube and withdraw the penis while it’s still erect while grasping the base of the condom…they can still break. They can slip off the penis and leak their contents inside the vagina.
I honestly think Perfect Use numbers should be eliminated from Contraceptive Effectiveness rate charts and packaging info. It’s like if Microsoft ran some numbers and declared that, with Perfect Use, Windows will fail 1 time in every 100 user years. Ok, maybe, but we all know that in reality, it fails a lot more than that, once you get applications working at the same time that cause system errors, or automatic updates that restart your computer without warning just as you’re about to hit Submit (and I shit you not - this just happened to me, and I had in fact already used Windows as my analogy in this reply. I think Windows was trying to get revenge.). When I’m choosing an operating system, Perfect Use numbers are useless - I want to know how often here, in the real world, I’m going to have problems.
Perfect Use numbers are theory. Typical use are reality. Babies aren’t very theoretical at 2 AM when they’re hungry and you have to be at work in 5 hours.
And all girls get tubals. NO exceptions.
[/QUOTE]
As soon as egg harvesting is a safe as ejaculating into a cup and a tubal is as safe and no more invasive than a vasectomy, I’d advocate for both in Hypothetical Land. After all, vasectomies fail, too.
Of course, with this method the human race will be extinct in a couple hundred years.
With the much tauted 50% divorce rate doesn’t your whole argument break down here? Completely ignoring the whole idea of whether or not you are physically compatable for coital (?) sex with each other lifelong commitment to someone isn’t what it used to be.
Actually, my idea was for the procedures to be reversed at some point, which, looking harder at Lynn’s post, I should have specified.
That’s true, WhyNot, but I also need some number that indicates “effectiveness when not used by fucking morons”. I guess “typical use while following product directions”. Because I know better than to get the condom on wrong, take it off, flip it around, and use it. Or than to use that condom that’s been in a guy’s wallet for three years. Or than to use the same condom for more than one encounter, etc., etc.
It’s good that you have that opinion, but other women do not. A very large component of the clients I see in my spiritual advising (fortune telling business) have no higher dreams than to latch on to a man (anyway they can) who will take them out of working class life.
It does not seem irrational to me. If I were single, I would not be willing to have sex with a woman I was not prepared to raise a child with. While that doesn’t mean I wouldn’t have sex before marriage/engagement, it does mean that if a woman wanted to wait, and I were in love with her, I’d be willing to.
The thing is, harvesting sperm samples is pretty easy. Harvesting eggs is much more invasive. With frozen sperm samples, there’s no need to reverse the procedures. And the procedure for a vasectomy is not nearly as invasive as a tubal ligation, either.
As for it being forced surgery, yeah, that is an ethical issue. My defense is that it’ll happen when I’m empress of the earth (that is, never) and even if I DO somehow manage to attain that position, I imagine that I’d be overthrown very shortly.
Seriously, though, I wonder why the guys who are so paranoid about some woman using them for child support payments DON’T make deposits and then get the Big V. Surely it would be cheaper and it would relieve their minds. They can still get STDs, so they’d be wise to use rubbers…but they wouldn’t have to worry about evil wimmins stealing their manjuice to impregnate themselves.
The thing is, they collect that data in an interesting way. Because “Typical condom use” includes things like not using condoms when it isn’t convenient. A lot of the women who became pregnant while typically using condoms became impregnated from a time they didn’t use a condom.
“Perfect Use” just means that you used a condom all the time, and if the condom broke or the condom was all the way over in the bathroom, you didn’t just have sex anyway.
This is true, but unless you’re a Hollywood celebrity, marriages tend to last for longer than a month. It’s much more likely for a relationship to end if there is no deep emotional attachment to each other beyond infatuation, and especially so when there’s legal attachment. However:
This is a better way to put it. I think that one should have a deep, well-founded trust and familiarity with the other person, to the point where they could be acknowledged as a potential spouse. That’s a very subjective and vague sentiment though, so I just simplified and said “married/engaged”, which was rather stupid, as many have rightly pointed out. Like most of my ideas, they’re never fully thought out until I have someone point out the glaring flaws.
I think it’s adorable that you’re extrapolating the motives of women in general from a pool of the sorts of people who go to fortune tellers.
But he’s not extrapolating the motives of women, he’s saying that there are some women who are just out to snag a man and it isn’t stupid to be guarded.
It’s smart to be guarded regardless of the motives of other people. If YOU don’t want children, then take care of that yourself, be it through abstinence, condoms, vasectomy, whatever. Do that, and you won’t have to spend your time worrying about them sneaky wimminfolk.
With improved techniques it would be possible. Hell, grow all kids in vats, problem solved.
Hail Ford!
I think seeing the same delusion leading to destructive behavior in a few thousand women a year is a social problem.
Because they don’t like the idea of being cut up, or of undergoing difficult to reverse surgery without clear necessity. And samples can be lost. And men don’t like women being free with the integrity of their bodies any more than women like it when men do the same; it’s easy to say a vasectomy is no big deal when you are a woman.
And another problem with an “everyone gets irreversibly sterilized” plan; if there’s a collapse of civilization, humanity goes extinct.