|
|
Post by goz on Nov 3, 2018 20:28:51 GMT
1) I know. I'm not blaming women. 2) Because giving men testosterone who don't need it is unethical. The contraceptive pill wouldn't get tested now either. 1. 2. Then women should not be using the pill. There fore your comment on other forms of contraceptive is null and void and rather foolish, not to mention sexist and men should NEVER have sex EVER without using a condom unless they are planning a pregnancy with their partner. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 3, 2018 20:38:34 GMT
Can you link us up some examples of this? Try this thread.... Ah... the old 'I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about so SQUIRREL!" I find your posts interesting... it's like Arlon with a limited vocabulary. |
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Nov 4, 2018 1:48:50 GMT
Ah... the old 'I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about so SQUIRREL!" I find your posts interesting... it's like Arlon with a limited vocabulary. ITs not my fault you didn't read the thread. |
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Nov 4, 2018 1:50:55 GMT
1) I know. I'm not blaming women. 2) Because giving men testosterone who don't need it is unethical. The contraceptive pill wouldn't get tested now either. 1.2. Then women should not be using the pill. There fore your comment on other forms of contraceptive is null and void and rather foolish, not to mention sexist and men should NEVER have sex EVER without using a condom unless they are planning a pregnancy with their partner. 1) *sigh* 2) No, consider why weed was illegal and alcohol wasn't. The same applies here. It is unethical to manipulate hormones to reduce fertility, however, the Pillis out there and there is no way anyone would allow it to be withdrawn. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Nov 4, 2018 1:58:25 GMT
1.2. Then women should not be using the pill. There fore your comment on other forms of contraceptive is null and void and rather foolish, not to mention sexist and men should NEVER have sex EVER without using a condom unless they are planning a pregnancy with their partner. 1) *sigh* 2) No, consider why weed was illegal and alcohol wasn't. The same applies here. however, the Pillis out there and there is no way anyone would allow it to be withdrawn. 1. Do you deny contradicting yourself, despite the evidence? 2. That is the greatest load of bollocks you have ever written, apart from the nonsense in No 1. and yet as a sexist misogynistic male you expect women to continue to do so, because 'reasons' that are unethical, sexist and a pathetic 'status quo' argument? You have seriously lost the plot! |
|
|
|
Post by thorshairspray on Nov 4, 2018 2:03:07 GMT
1) *sigh* 2) No, consider why weed was illegal and alcohol wasn't. The same applies here. however, the Pillis out there and there is no way anyone would allow it to be withdrawn. 1. Do you deny contradicting yourself, despite the evidence? 2. That is the greatest load of bollocks you have ever written, apart from the nonsense in No 1. and yet as a sexist misogynistic male you expect women to continue to do so, because 'reasons' that are unethical, sexist and a pathetic 'status quo' argument? You have seriously lost the plot! 1) Your lack of reading comprehension isn't my fault 2) It not my fault you do not understand why things that were acceptable 60 years ago aren't now. As I said elsewhere, observing reality doesn't make one a bigot. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Nov 4, 2018 2:19:49 GMT
goz 1) Yes. You know unprotected sex can lead to pregnancy. You let a man have unprotected sex with you and you get pregnant, you've nobody to blame but yourself. 2) 75% of men involved in the study said they would be willing to use that form of contraception. Its nothing to do with men being wimps. We cannot easily force him, so the responsibility makes it solely his, He should be responsible for his fertility at all times. This is not only factually incorrect, but it effectively disempowers women by treating them like helpless children. Unless he physically forces her, she has the power to refuse. If she declines to refuse unprotected sex, then she must carry her part of the responsibility. If anything, her responsibility is even greater, as it is her body, and the guy might skip town if she gets pregnant for all she knows. He can escape her pregnancy by being a cad, but she cannot. She will then be stuck with a new choice: abortion, adoption or raising the child. She needs to take this into consideration every time she consents to unprotected sex. Yes, the man has a responsibility, no one is denying that. But it takes two to tango. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Nov 4, 2018 2:26:18 GMT
1. Do you deny contradicting yourself, despite the evidence? 2. That is the greatest load of bollocks you have ever written, apart from the nonsense in No 1. and yet as a sexist misogynistic male you expect women to continue to do so, because 'reasons' that are unethical, sexist and a pathetic 'status quo' argument? You have seriously lost the plot! 1) Your lack of reading comprehension isn't my fault 2) It not my fault you do not understand why things that were acceptable 60 years ago aren't now. As I said elsewhere, observing reality doesn't make one a bigot. Did you not say that quote? I quoted you. That is nothing to do with reading comprehension it is a matter of record and fact. Nice deflection in the desperation of being shown to have said it. Things being acceptable 60 years ago with new scientific discoveries has NOTHING to do with what is acceptable today for both sexes. If tampering with normal hormone balance for males is unacceptable then the same should be said for females. To say or even imply this is this case, is indeed evidence of sexist bigotry. The reality is that it is dangerous for both sexes to tamper with their hormone balance, so the advice should be the same for both sexes. Don't do it. Instead we still have the option of males not having sex with women, unless they are wearing a condom and using it properly or NOT putting their penises into female vaginas without one, due to a risk of both pregnancy and disease As I stated before it is the male responsibility due to the biology of his overt dominance in this situation with his penis and sperm being the active ingredients in pregnancy. It is quite hard for a female to force an unwilling male, so the buck/fuck stops there! Total responsibility for pregnancy. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Nov 4, 2018 2:30:14 GMT
We cannot easily force him, so the responsibility makes it solely his, He should be responsible for his fertility at all times. This is not only factually incorrect, but it effectively disempowers women by treating them like helpless children. Unless he physically forces her, she has the power to refuse. If she declines to refuse unprotected sex, then she must carry her part of the responsibility. If anything, her responsibility is even greater, as it is her body, and the guy might skip town if she gets pregnant for all she knows. He can escape her pregnancy by being a cad, but she cannot. She will then be stuck with a new choice: abortion, adoption or raising the child. She needs to take this into consideration every time she consents to unprotected sex. Yes, the man has a responsibility, no one is denying that. But it takes two to tango. No. Even if the woman consents, she does NOT have the power to become pregnant if he is wearing a condom. A condom fits on HIS penis therefore it is in his power and it is HIS responsibility to prevent a pregnancy. She does not have a penis Without HIS penile actions she CANNOT become pregnant. It is ALL on him. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Nov 4, 2018 2:33:29 GMT
This is not only factually incorrect, but it effectively disempowers women by treating them like helpless children. Unless he physically forces her, she has the power to refuse. If she declines to refuse unprotected sex, then she must carry her part of the responsibility. If anything, her responsibility is even greater, as it is her body, and the guy might skip town if she gets pregnant for all she knows. He can escape her pregnancy by being a cad, but she cannot. She will then be stuck with a new choice: abortion, adoption or raising the child. She needs to take this into consideration every time she consents to unprotected sex. Yes, the man has a responsibility, no one is denying that. But it takes two to tango. No. Even if the woman consents, she does NOT have the power to become pregnant if he is wearing a condom. A condom fits on HIS penis therefore it is in his power and it is HIS responsibility to prevent a pregnancy. She does not have a penis Without HIS penile actions she CANNOT become pregnant. It is ALL on him. She has the power to insist on condoms. "Condom, or no sex". Whether or not she has the power to become pregnant if he does wear a condom is completely besides the point. The point is, if she lets him put his peepee in her without a condom, she accepts the risks associated with unprotected sex. Additionally, there are numerous contraceptives available for women. More, in fact, than for men.
Frankly, this insistence that it is HIS responsibility alone is misogynistic in the extreme. You know what equality means? Equal rights and privileges. You know what equal rights and privileges mean? Equal responsibility. You cannot have equal rights without equal responsibility, and equal accountability. Without responsibility and accountability, you are a child who needs others to take care of you.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Nov 4, 2018 2:55:22 GMT
No. Even if the woman consents, she does NOT have the power to become pregnant if he is wearing a condom. A condom fits on HIS penis therefore it is in his power and it is HIS responsibility to prevent a pregnancy. She does not have a penis Without HIS penile actions she CANNOT become pregnant. It is ALL on him. She has the power to insist on condoms. "Condom, or no sex". Whether or not she has the power to become pregnant if he does wear a condom is completely besides the point. The point is, if she lets him put his peepee in her without a condom, she accepts the risks associated with unprotected sex. Additionally, there are numerous contraceptives available for women. More, in fact, than for men.
Frankly, this insistence that it is HIS responsibility alone is misogynistic in the extreme. You know what equality means? Equal rights and privileges. You know what equal rights and privileges mean? Equal responsibility. You cannot have equal rights without equal responsibility, and equal accountability. Without responsibility and accountability, you are a child who needs others to take care of you.
Nope. It is HIS penis ( peepee is childish lol) HIS responsibility. HE knows what the consequences are EVEN if a woman begs him, IF he puts an unprotected penis in her vagina, he still knows the consequences and he shouldn't do it. She can't get pregnant by herself, it is HIS penis and HIS sperm. He holds full responsibility. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Nov 4, 2018 3:10:39 GMT
She has the power to insist on condoms. "Condom, or no sex". Whether or not she has the power to become pregnant if he does wear a condom is completely besides the point. The point is, if she lets him put his peepee in her without a condom, she accepts the risks associated with unprotected sex. Additionally, there are numerous contraceptives available for women. More, in fact, than for men. Frankly, this insistence that it is HIS responsibility alone is misogynistic in the extreme. You know what equality means? Equal rights and privileges. You know what equal rights and privileges mean? Equal responsibility. You cannot have equal rights without equal responsibility, and equal accountability. Without responsibility and accountability, you are a child who needs others to take care of you.
Nope. It is HIS penis ( peepee is childish lol) And it's HER vagina. What, SHE doesn't? Neither should she. He is not the only one having unprotected sex. HER vagina and HER eggs. So the woman has no mind of her own. Gotcha. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Nov 4, 2018 3:15:13 GMT
Nope. It is HIS penis ( peepee is childish lol) And it's HER vagina. What, SHE doesn't? Neither should she. He is not the only one having unprotected sex. HER vagina and HER eggs. So the woman has no mind of her own. Gotcha. I don't think you are understanding this. Biology 101. It takes a male with sperm to fertilise a woman's egg by putting his penis into her vagina. IF this does not happen, a woman doesn't and cannot get pregnant. It REQUIRES a man to become erect and place his penis in her vagina. SHE DOES NOT DO THIS. He does. IF he does NOT, she cannot and doesn't become pregnant. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Nov 4, 2018 3:23:31 GMT
And it's HER vagina. What, SHE doesn't? Neither should she. He is not the only one having unprotected sex. HER vagina and HER eggs. So the woman has no mind of her own. Gotcha. I don't think you are understanding this. Biology 101. It takes a male with sperm to fertilise a woman's egg by putting his penis into her vagina. I think you're the one who could do with the biology crash course. A man can't get pregnant alone. It takes a woman also. If the sex is consentual, they BOTH agree to the risks. How are you not getting this? And unless he breaks the law by raping her, he can't get her pregnant without her consent either. And it REQUIRES a woman with a vagina in the first place. YES SHE DOES. Like I said, takes two to tango. And if SHE refuses sex, he cannot and does not get her pregnant. Unless we are talking rape, which is a completely different discussion.
Honestly, you are so hell-bent on relieving women of all accountability that I wonder if you don't belong in the middle ages.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Nov 4, 2018 3:33:17 GMT
I don't think you are understanding this. Biology 101. It takes a male with sperm to fertilise a woman's egg by putting his penis into her vagina. I think you're the one who could do with the biology crash course. A man can't get pregnant alone. It takes a woman also. If the sex is consentual, they BOTH agree to the risks. How are you not getting this? And unless he breaks the law by raping her, he can't get her pregnant without her consent either. And it REQUIRES a woman with a vagina in the first place. YES SHE DOES. Like I said, takes two to tango. And if SHE refuses sex, he cannot and does not get her pregnant. Unless we are talking rape, which is a completely different discussion. You are still not getting this. It has nothing to do with consent or rape. It is biology and how the sexual function works. It requires the male to be the initiator to have an erection and enter the female and ejaculate. This has NOTHING to do with the female. By definition the male MUST be responsible for pregnancy. Believe it or not, this has happened to women who are comatose in hospital. Let's take the opposite example. Say a man and a woman marry and want to have a baby. Problem is he had a catastrophic accident and is a quadriplegic. The woman is utterly unable to become pregnant to the man without intervention as he cannot get an erection nor enter her vagina. Sadly, who is responsible for her pregnancy or non-pregnancy? The male. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Nov 4, 2018 3:49:04 GMT
You are still not getting this. It has nothing to do with consent or rape. It is biology and how the sexual function works. It requires the male to be the initiator to have an erection and enter the female and ejaculate. This has NOTHING to do with the female. It does not require the male to be the initiator. Courtship is a two-way street. There will be no sex unless BOTH make the choice. In that case, what about women who have gotten themselves pregnant by riding unconscious men? Or who have raped men? It does happen, you know. But like I said, rape is irrelevant to the discussion, because we are discussing consentual sex. That means sex between two adults who BOTH decide to have sex. He can only get her pregnant on HER invitation. She can still get pregnant, with another male. In this particular case, her lack of pregnancy is 100% on her. She makes the choice to stay faithful, which is commendable, but it is her choice nevertheless. He, being quadriplegic, is completely incapable of effecting her pregnancy. She, however, is not incapable. She is just unwilling. How about this scenario: You are a security guard monitoring the surveillance cams of the building of some bigwig. Someone is at the entrance, buzzing to get in. You see that he carries a shotgun. You let him in. He enters and proceeds to shoot up the place. Sure, YOU didn't fire a single shot, but don't you have ANY responsibility for letting him in? You KNEW what would happen, and you still let him in. You didn't have to, but you did anyway. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Nov 4, 2018 3:52:26 GMT
You are still not getting this. It has nothing to do with consent or rape. It is biology and how the sexual function works. It requires the male to be the initiator to have an erection and enter the female and ejaculate. This has NOTHING to do with the female. It does not require the male to be the initiator. Courtship is a two-way street. There will be no sex unless BOTH make the choice. In that case, what about women who have gotten themselves pregnant by riding unconscious men? Or who have raped men? It does happen, you know. But like I said, rape is irrelevant to the discussion, because we are discussing consentual sex. That means sex between two adults who BOTH decide to have sex. He can only get her pregnant on HER invitation. She can still get pregnant, with another male. In this particular case, her lack of pregnancy is 100% on her. She makes the choice to stay faithful, which is commendable, but it is her choice nevertheless. He, being quadriplegic, is completely incapable of effecting her pregnancy. She, however, is not incapable. She is just unwilling. How about this scenario: You are a security guard monitoring the surveillance cams of the building of some bigwig. Someone is at the entrance, buzzing to get in. You see that he carries a shotgun. You let him in. He enters and proceeds to shoot up the place. Sure, YOU didn't fire a single shot, but don't you have ANY responsibility for letting him in? You KNEW what would happen, and you still let him in. You didn't have to, but you did anyway. You have strayed from the topic of the biology of male female mating which is entirely the responsibility of the male with erection and entrance of penis into the vagina...his total responsibility. |
|
|
|
Post by Karl Aksel on Nov 4, 2018 3:57:49 GMT
It does not require the male to be the initiator. Courtship is a two-way street. There will be no sex unless BOTH make the choice. In that case, what about women who have gotten themselves pregnant by riding unconscious men? Or who have raped men? It does happen, you know. But like I said, rape is irrelevant to the discussion, because we are discussing consentual sex. That means sex between two adults who BOTH decide to have sex. He can only get her pregnant on HER invitation. She can still get pregnant, with another male. In this particular case, her lack of pregnancy is 100% on her. She makes the choice to stay faithful, which is commendable, but it is her choice nevertheless. He, being quadriplegic, is completely incapable of effecting her pregnancy. She, however, is not incapable. She is just unwilling. How about this scenario: You are a security guard monitoring the surveillance cams of the building of some bigwig. Someone is at the entrance, buzzing to get in. You see that he carries a shotgun. You let him in. He enters and proceeds to shoot up the place. Sure, YOU didn't fire a single shot, but don't you have ANY responsibility for letting him in? You KNEW what would happen, and you still let him in. You didn't have to, but you did anyway. You have strayed from the topic of the biology of male female mating which is entirely the responsibility of the male with erection and entrance of penis into the vagina...his total responsibility. How do you figure I've strayed? I've stayed on topic 100%. Mating does not consist of the male putting his penis into the vagina. That is only one part of it, HIS part. Before he can do that, SHE needs to let him. And that is HER total responsibility. Mating - unless you are counting rape, and why on earth would you - requires MUTUAL consent. It's not just the man putting his dick in a hole. |
|
|
|
Post by islandmur on Nov 4, 2018 4:28:54 GMT
I'm sorry but isn't there such a thing as female condoms? I know there are.
And again sorry but "my body my right"... no condon no sex
Because when it comes to abortion women have absolutely no problem saying a man doesn't get a say because it's their body. And yet after the baby is born it's child support.
I have a real problem with this mentality, because it's hypocrite. Yes it is. We want to have it both ways.
If it's my body my right then I'm the one that has to make sure I don't get pregnant in the first place. Men doesn't want to wear condom? then sorry you can't put your penis in my vagina. Or I wear a female condom (and woment don't like them for the same reasons men don't it's not comfortable) I wear an IUD or take the pill or the shot or the patch or buy ovulation stick or or or or or....
Yes it takes two to have sex, but only one of us gets pregnant. It's not that I wouldn't want men to act more responsibly, it's that what I want and what reality is are two differnt things. A man that won't wear a condon 1) isn't a man I want to have sex with not only because of getting pregnant but because of STD's, because it's not the kind of man that will take care of a child or help with medical bills.
What's this men need to be held responsible shit... so to hold them responsible you risk getting pregnant or getting an STD just to prove that well men should wear condons when having sex because it takes two to make a baby?
Really?
Get a grip and face reality, men don't care precisely because they won't get pregnant, you're the one that's going to carry a baby for 9 whole months, youre the one that's going to have your vagina ripped all the way to your anus, you're the one who is going to take care of that child for the next foreseable future... so yeah keep insisting that men be responsible.
|
|
|
|
Post by puvo on Nov 4, 2018 4:34:51 GMT
It does not require the male to be the initiator. Courtship is a two-way street. There will be no sex unless BOTH make the choice. In that case, what about women who have gotten themselves pregnant by riding unconscious men? Or who have raped men? It does happen, you know. But like I said, rape is irrelevant to the discussion, because we are discussing consentual sex. That means sex between two adults who BOTH decide to have sex. He can only get her pregnant on HER invitation. She can still get pregnant, with another male. In this particular case, her lack of pregnancy is 100% on her. She makes the choice to stay faithful, which is commendable, but it is her choice nevertheless. He, being quadriplegic, is completely incapable of effecting her pregnancy. She, however, is not incapable. She is just unwilling. How about this scenario: You are a security guard monitoring the surveillance cams of the building of some bigwig. Someone is at the entrance, buzzing to get in. You see that he carries a shotgun. You let him in. He enters and proceeds to shoot up the place. Sure, YOU didn't fire a single shot, but don't you have ANY responsibility for letting him in? You KNEW what would happen, and you still let him in. You didn't have to, but you did anyway. You have strayed from the topic of the biology of male female mating which is entirely the responsibility of the male with erection and entrance of penis into the vagina...his total responsibility. It is clearly the responsibility of both parties. There are multiple types of birth control (some for men, some for women) and it is the responsibility of both people to take adequate steps to avoid pregnancy before starting. |
|
