We sure did. I woke up that zombie with the link to current CNN article (also linked above) but apparently this thread was more interesting. <shrug>
Somehow, someway, I am skeptical. Doesn’t sperm die off pretty quickly once it leaves the body? She would have to keep it in her mouth, take off, and put it into something safe. Then again, she probably had this whole thing planned out and had the materials/containers/whatever ready, in which case I’m too touchy.
In any case, I don’t think anyone could be in that mans position with his motions. With such weird circumstances, it is just too hard to fellate.
“to use plaintiff’s sperm in an unorthodox, unanticipated manner”
Unanticipated, sure. But using sperm to become pregnant might not be considered unorthodox. It is pretty much the raison d’etre of sperm. I think the guy is getting the short end of the stick, but he has a lot of precedent to fight. If a guy screws a woman the good ol’ fashion way and she gets pregnant without his knowledge, he’s held responsible. I think the difference is that this guy had reasonable expectation of no pregnancy. After all, the woman had to take extrordinary steps to deliberately impregnate herself. Without his knowledge or implied permission. I think that would be a reasonable defense on his part.
Anyone else thinking “Doper gift exchange!!!”
OK, probably not.
They could call them “Spermits.”
The woman claims they had good old-fashioned intercourse and she became pregnant as a result. The guy has to prove she performed oral sex and used to semen to impregnate herself. Unless he has the entire thing on tape, I doubt he can do it.
I’d just like to chime in and say The Raison d’Etre of Sperm would be a great name for a novel.
You da’bomb, Hypno-Toad. If I come to a dopefest can I lick your back?
If red birds have little red babies
And blue birds have little blue babies
What kind of bird has NO babies?
See, the joke just doesn’t work anymore.
So women have the choice whether or not they want to be mothers, but men don’t have the choice in whether or not they want to be fathers?
If, as Philips claimed, they only engaged in oral, then he had no reason to believe she would become pregnant from that. She went to extra lengths to impregnate herself with his “gift.”
She’s a sneaky, slimy woman and I feel sorry for that baby.
Yes fathers are sort of an oppressed group.
The choice does exist before the child is conceived, but only women still have the choice to after the child is conceived.
What really gets me is if a man is raped and she get pregnant, he can still be held responsible.
Well, I would think so. And in so many ways.
But in this case, Philips is claiming he engaged in a sex act that no reasonable person would believe would lead directly to a pregnancy.
Or for those who participate in totally anonymous sexual encounters.
Moving this from IMHO to Great Debates.
But what if she needs to feed her fish?!
runs
Which is more likely, a man and a woman have vaginal sex and conceive a child
OR
Woman has oral sex with man, saves up sperm, inseminates self, and gets pregnant?
Sorry, but I’m gonna go with Occam here.
Well then, the joke’s on the kid. The mother is psychotic and the father is trapped in a nightmare.
Perhaps you misread me, or maybe I’m missing something. I’m talking about if the woman forces the man to have sex with her against his will.
Not entirely on topic, but I found a great article reviewing similar cases. Here it is.
That’s a good article. And it asks a very pertinent question…
I envision nervous guys having their sperm frozen for future use and held in high security facilities, then being sterilized. Highly unlikely, but not impossible if the Courts are going to hold guys responsible for children conceived by them while they’re unconscious.