The pill and libido

VeronicaF · 16-11-11 05:12:20

Also I would like to call Reductio ad Hitlerum on that and suggest you look into Godwin's Law

Xebeche · 16-11-11 05:18:31

viva wrote:

Here we go!

Nope! Believe me, I almost used a tone with Veronica that I haven't ever used on anyone here (even The Jeffo), but, I channeled my inner Blissed and tried to remain very, very calm to reply.

He's good at that, you know.

But seriously, it's going to be quite Vonnegutly humorous when our entire species is sitting on the brink of extinction. Perhaps a child containing unique blood cells with properties that could cure most people would be born, but because we are so smart we've designed machines to weed these undesirables out and so a first hour abortifacient is introduced preventing fertilization and eventual birth. buh bai hoomans!

Vern - let me know when that computer is being built so I can go all Sarah Conner on it and smash its ...um...ASCII. Yeah.

Xebeche · 16-11-11 05:33:26

Gloves off.

VeronicaF wrote:

Also I would like to call Reductio ad Hitlerum on that and suggest you look into Godwin's Law

Yes, wise ass. I thought of that before I made it - I made the same comment to Blissed a while back. Or did you somehow know that /wink? I'm sorry to disappoint, though - I find it very helpful in life that when possible, it's best to know what answers people will give publicly before a question is asked.

To wit: Godwin's Law on Wiki

"The law and its corollaries would not apply to discussions covering known mainstays of Nazi Germany such as genocide, eugenics or racial superiority, nor, more debatably, to a discussion of other totalitarian regimes or ideologies, since a Nazi comparison in those circumstances may be appropriate, in effect committing the fallacist's fallacy."

Now, would you like to call a truce now? Or push yourself further into the category of "wouldn't make the 'intelligent enough'" cut?

Last edited by Xebeche (16-11-11 05:34:00)

domC · 16-11-11 05:43:39

Viva - no I completely agree, using a non-hormonal contraception is no more natural than using a chemical one. My gripe was more with the initial comment which implied lesbian sex requires no contraception and can give a "natural hormonal balance" like that was somehow ideal or actually the way things are. The comments from you and Jane_e bring up lots of things I actually agree with and I'm more willing to engage in discussions about female contraception with, well, other women who are actually using the stuff. Sorry, Blissed! Any frustration is mostly directed out into the ether, where there's a constant finger wagging at people who use chemicals to do things that could potentially be done without the use of chemicals but to differing effects. I think we all agree, the great shittiness is in the lack of contraceptive options and that the onus generally falls on women to "take care of things".

Related question: if there was an oral contraceptive for men, would women trust it as much as men do when we say we're on the pill - given that men aren't the ones who are going to conceive?

domC · 16-11-11 05:49:14

+1 for tactfully avoiding eugenics discussion...

VeronicaF · 16-11-11 05:58:39

Xebeche wrote:

To wit: Godwin's Law on Wiki
"The law and its corollaries would not apply to discussions covering known mainstays of Nazi Germany such as genocide, eugenics or racial superiority, nor, more debatably, to a discussion of other totalitarian regimes or ideologies, since a Nazi comparison in those circumstances may be appropriate, in effect committing the fallacist's fallacy."

Touché... however this:

Xebeche wrote:

Now, would you like to call a truce now? Or push yourself further into the category of "wouldn't make the 'intelligent enough'" cut?

is a little unnecessary. I don't claim to be superior, I'm waiting for the upgrades.

And no I didn't know about that discussion with blissed as I'm not often on the IFM forums. Generally too busy playing with pretty pictures.

VeronicaF · 16-11-11 06:05:20

domC wrote:

+1 for tactfully avoiding eugenics discussion...

<3<3<3<3<3

Xebeche · 16-11-11 06:25:20

VeronicaF wrote:

Touché... however this:
Xebeche wrote:
Now, would you like to call a truce now? Or push yourself further into the category of "wouldn't make the 'intelligent enough'" cut?
is a little unnecessary. I don't claim to be superior, I'm waiting for the upgrades.
And no I didn't know about that discussion with blissed as I'm not often on the IFM forums. Generally too busy playing with pretty pictures.

I unconditionally apologize. I read your rejoinders as hostile and apparently misunderstood your intended tone.

The very last thing I want on these forums is to ever, ever drown out a woman's voice - contributor or not.

viva · 16-11-11 06:25:26

domC wrote:

Related question: if there was an oral contraceptive for men, would women trust it as much as men do when we say we're on the pill - given that men aren't the ones who are going to conceive?

OH MY GOD that is a horrible yet extremely relevant thought. How will we know!? Why wouldn't he lie!? Lies are cheaper and he won't be here when I'm preggers in the morning and maybe that's why women have to be responsible for everything and maybe I should just crawl into a sex cave by myself where there are no babies *cry*

Seriously I never thought of that point and it is ruining me and my dreams of equal responsibility as we speak.

Re: veronica - oh I'll get in there! I also have some pictures to play with but until I can respond properly tomorrow morning, keep your computer overlords and regulatories and governmentalists out of my body, baby!

viva · 16-11-11 06:34:34

Wait a minute.. Bobby just pointed out to me that we're not having sex without condoms anyway when we don't trust each other... we're not right? right?

domC · 16-11-11 06:54:31

No, we're not (er, now, that is, but see below), but it's still a bit of a hazy area and fodder for thought. Maybe your partner forgets to take his man-pill, maybe he suddenly decides he wants you pregnant? There's got to be a list of hypothetical "what ifs" there and as soon as the responsibility falls on the person who's not going to conceive, there's a few more points you need to think of. Whatever the case, it's still going to be the woman who gets to deal with the consequences if something goes wrong, intentional or otherwise. I don't know what level of "trust" people get to before they start having sex with someone without a condom. I've heard some people who say they've had a STD check and after a few dates and a few screws, it's up for discussion. The criteria for "trust" is going to vary from person to person and it's not like there's some greenlight system that let's you know it is now safe to fuck this person with condom-less abandon.

And we're saying all of this as reasonably sexually open adults who talk about stuff, really consider all the implications and what have you. So yeah, maybe we're not having sex without condoms with people we don't really trust (though I have, in the past - d'oy), but there's a trend amongst teenagers and young people to think that condoms are uncool again - hence why Scarleteen just published this: http://www.scarleteen.com/article/body/ … _heard_yet and their second point is to try and knock the belief amongst young people that barebacking is "cool" and to only think about contraception issues.

Xebeche · 16-11-11 07:05:02

You'll know.

Consider:
a) the first Birth control pills for women used VERY high doses of hormones. You think you have side effects now? I can't imagine what some of those women went through. The first pill for men will not be perfect - and we will complain like you can't believe. It will probably be helpful in determining if he's on the pill (but god, do you want him now? ) You are right though, it will require some arm-bending to get men to man up and take responsibility.

b) If I had any scientific gumption, I'd extrapolate on the idea of a diabetic blood monitor. Easy conversation follows: "You wanna fuck me? Show me your blood level of > medicine xxx <". Guy pricks finger with needle, measures chemical content and shares with lady, voila. I don't know, maybe it's a horrible idea, just the first thought I had =p

viva · 17-11-11 00:44:18

I think that once you're in the kind of established relationship where it's ok to stop using condoms, at that point either party can be equally implicated by emotional dishonesty, regardless of where that rogue baby's gonna gestate. I know that a woman who wants to get pregnant conveniently "forgetting" to take her pill is often a responsible, decent hetero man's worst nightmare - because though theoretically he can just walk away, in actuality, morally and spatially, it's just not that simple. and he might be just as traumatized by the deceit and the burgeoning responsibility as a woman - maybe more, because a woman can choose to have an abortion if she's unwantedly impregnated, while a man simply has to see that baby come to life.

ps. Thankyou for that Scarleteen article, as a condom user who wishes I didn't have to use them it made me feel really good!

Point a) from Xebeche - I'm no scientist, but from tmy rudimentary knowledge of human reproductive systems I always suspected that de-fertilizing sperm would be less complicated hormonally and totally than changing the entire reproductive environment of a woman. A woman's body is functionally reproductive - a great part of our midsection is given over to uterus-land, and our entire body is ready to flush and swell and change at the very hint of fertilization. We drop an egg every month, hold our breath and wait. Boys just come all over the place whenever they feel like it and their sperm production is really localised.

And that is your daily dose of Science by Some Chick.

No but seriously, the article Blissed posted backs my shit up, to wit: Male Pilzzz

From the wikipede, some options consider preventing ejaculation as a method of birth control, while permitting orgasmic sensation. My boy tried all sorts of crazy techniques and breathing exercises for awhile to achieve a similar effect, that was a really bad time for us.

What do you guys think? Is het sex still sex if the guys doesn't ejaculate?

blissed · 17-11-11 01:19:43

When it comes the male pill I feel the same way as Jane about taking them. I have had an orgasm without ejaculation through stress and it's worse than coming into a condom, I didn't like it.
My favourite choice if skin to skin felt too risky and inhibiting is a female condom secured by a soft grip ring outside the vagina preventing the condom from being pushed in and a diaphragm fitted by me using a keyhole camera so we can both inspect the seal. Sounds a little daunting for some but not for 2 people with a nice friendship connection and certainly not after the 20th time. I think birth control is a shared experience rather than the sole responsibility of who ever takes the pill or wears the contraption

domC wrote:

Sorry, Blissed! Any frustration is mostly directed out into the ether, where there's a constant finger wagging at people who use chemicals to do things that could potentially be done without the use of chemicals but to differing effects.

That's OK it's a good point. thanks for reminding me there are all kinds of people who's natural state is uncomfortable.

I had a thought when someone mentioned Glen Becks hero Hitler I'm sure when he brought in animal welfare laws banning fox hunting and vivisection most people who voted for him wouldn't have dreamed in 1933 (certainly with that era's level of naivety) that he could or would actually gas millions of people. I feel a movie idea coming on. How someone joins the Nazi party to help enact the animal welfare laws and that gives them trusted visa status to take their whole family on a permanent foreign holiday except the war catches up with them and their holiday destination is invaded and half the cast including the central character are suddenly killed mid scene by a bomb 2 3rds through the movie, just like in a real war. Not sure I could work on something so bloody depressing though

Dom when it comes to future tech. DNA modification would enable non cis gendered men to transition to become reproductive women and vice versa and with that level of safe proven control over reproduction I would think most sexual adventures could be pretty wonderful.

.

Last edited by blissed (17-11-11 01:27:31)

viva · 17-11-11 02:34:12

Blissed, why would you object to taking a male pill like in the article you linked to, which doesn't effect hormones or ejaculation but only the sperm themselves?

personally, the female condoms/diaphragms seem really unappealing to me... and they scare me.

blissed · 17-11-11 03:03:38

Because I've never taken any recreational drugs and I eat organic food and don't trust an invasive drug that alters the balance of my body. Could take it for short periods though but not full time perminantly. Drugs in that catagory haven't got a good track record. any imbalance that produces even a tiny bit more toxity than the body can handle can do damage over a long period, just like pesticide residue on food.

Have you tried female condoms or a diaphragm, you might find they're horrible, or you might find they're a better experience than you thought. I've tried a load of condoms and still haven't found one that stays put. But it's just a case of trying different things until we find something that works.

.

Last edited by blissed (17-11-11 03:05:42)

VeronicaF · 17-11-11 03:10:46

But DNA modification is ok?

blissed wrote:

Dom when it comes to future tech. DNA modification would enable non cis gendered men to transition to become reproductive women and vice versa and with that level of safe proven control over reproduction I would think most sexual adventures could be pretty wonderful.
.

blissed · 17-11-11 04:15:05

blissed wrote:

and with that level of safe proven control

With the DNA we are taliking about he distant future Acupuncture was a new technology once but around 7,000 years of development later it seems to be wholistically sound. If I'm reluctant to take the male pill I can't expect a partner to take the female pill. I think we all have to be sexually empowered and decide for ourselves and respect other peoples choices, especially someone we have affection for.

One human body has trillions of components just like the entire human presence on earth with all our technology down to the last nut and bolt. Drugs in the body are like trade imbargoes and government laws, the organism reacts to them and is changed, but in an inprecise way with side effects. DNA manipulation get's into the precise reasons why the organism is organised the way it is. If proven and safe we can redesign ourselves and create new life to a design. We're not anywhere near that concept or technology being proven safe yet and mistakes could be horrific. But when it is proven safe it'd be as amazing as the pain relief or cure afforded by acupuncture.

.

Last edited by blissed (17-11-11 04:16:20)

Liandra_Dahl · 17-11-11 14:26:16

What a fascinating discussion. I have heard that lambskin condoms can feel quite alot like there is flesh inside you. They prevent pregnancy but do not prevent sti's.

domC · 17-11-11 21:55:20

Haha, Blissed, I don't think positioning a contraceptive device on your female partner is generally what we mean when we say that contraception is a shared responsibility! I've been speaking about this with my house mate and we both agree that we have no problem with dealing with contraception and we don't feel particularly embittered if that side of sex is essentially our responsibility. I feel that condoms are generally something I prefer male partners to take care of (but I'll carry a few on me, "just in case"), but my house mate and I agree that with other contraceptives (we both use hormonal) neither of us have any beef with taking care of that ourselves. Ultimately, it's our body and we take responsibility for that, even if we've been dealt with the greater responsibility in a heterosexual relationship. I think that possibly comes from the knowledge that in the end, we're going to be the ones to deal with any consequences and while there is shared responsibility, as you say, Viva, when you are in some kind of established relationship, there is still generally a greater responsibility given to the owner of the womb (rightly or wrongly). I think we're raised on too many stories of men avoiding responsibility and while that's hardly indicative of all men, it's pretty compelling and there's plenty of stories of that happening. We all want to think we will be in a relationship of trust where that won't happen, but I've seen that fall to shit before and ultimately, if there's something growing in my womb, I'm going to be the one who makes the decisions and who has the potential to deal with the greater emotional aftermath. 9 months of pregnancy or an abortion, maybe adoption or raising the child - most of the brunt's covered by a woman and I'm ok with that, but it's why I want ownership of that responsibility. I know there are some fantastic dads, many ethical male partners, men who feel strongly about abortion, all that, but I think the "it's my body and this thing is growing inside of me" card is pretty powerful.

DNA modification? Wait, isn't that even more ethically fraught than hormonal contraception?

Before this topic, I don't think I'd ever actually had an in-depth discussion about birth control so it's interesting to see it gets such a knee-jerk reaction from me. I think maybe because I've been taking the pill for so long and because I'm fine with doing that, I haven't needed to think about it. It's given me all the things I want: control over my body and the way I use it, the knowledge that I'm pretty much covered and that it is my responsibility and I'm taking care of it. I come off sounding a lot more impassioned than I actually am and I'm happy to agree to disagree. It's been really interesting to see other sides of the argument. Anyway: I think I've exhausted what little passion I had and I don't have any more arguments to throw. Phew.

Last edited by domC (17-11-11 22:12:26)

blissed · 17-11-11 22:29:02

Yes you have what about my DNA modding service If you've always wanted to be a man then you can transition genetically and stop transitioning at any point of androgeny along that process at a point your most comfortable with or reverse it. The full transformation takes 7 years and costs $2499. but a reversal isn't refundable sorry.

We also offer a less controversial Transhuman conversion ®. A small part of your brain is removed and replaced with an implant. After a short while your ajoining brain cells connect and your thoughts occupy the implant and it forms part of your conscious and subconscious. We keep replacing small parts of your brain with your thoughts occupying each new implant until the last part of your old brain has been removed and your brain transnplant is complete with you still being you. You can now live for ever or expand your mind by having it removed from your body and installed in a server where it can be expanded 10x or 100x and connected to any external body or if you choose multiple bodies at the same time and/or you can interact in totally convincing virtual space. $105,999

When I said contraception is a shared responsibility I meant having intercourse is my last chance to choose beyond which either going full term or having an abortion isn't my choice but the soveriegnty of the womb owner. and shared because you don't want to get someone you like or love pregnant and see them go through the experience of termination and I wouldn't want my only part in this to be having an amazingly enjoyable orgasm. without offering full support in stopping it from happening including taking the male pill for short periods.

,

Last edited by blissed (17-11-11 23:03:22)

VeronicaF · 18-11-11 00:22:39

blissed wrote:

Yes you have what about my DNA modding service If you've always wanted to be a man then you can transition genetically and stop transitioning at any point of androgeny along that process at a point your most comfortable with or reverse it. The full transformation takes 7 years and costs $2499. but a reversal isn't refundable sorry.
We also offer a less controversial Transhuman conversion ®. A small part of your brain is removed and replaced with an implant. After a short while your ajoining brain cells connect and your thoughts occupy the implant and it forms part of your conscious and subconscious. We keep replacing small parts of your brain with your thoughts occupying each new implant until the last part of your old brain has been removed and your brain transnplant is complete with you still being you. You can now live for ever or expand your mind by having it removed from your body and installed in a server where it can be expanded 10x or 100x and connected to any external body or if you choose multiple bodies at the same time and/or you can interact in totally convincing virtual space. $105,999

This makes me soooooooo happy. BRING ON MAH ROBOT BODY!!!!

blissed · 18-11-11 00:57:03

Veronica 2040

.

VeronicaF · 18-11-11 03:14:01

Hehe.....Veronica 2100

(when we get that genetic modification going properly and I live in my beehive mansion built by universal constructors)

Last edited by VeronicaF (18-11-11 03:15:33)

blissed · 18-11-11 04:24:11

2101
Very nice!! but Oh beehive mansions are so last year. I'm a large luminous orange gas cloud floating in space made of communicating particles with dynamically changing formation form and structure as I grow and merge with other gas clouds of different colours in a dance of space, form and light that can be seen from earth in all 11 spacial dimensions.

.

#26 16-11-11 05:12:20

Re: The pill and libido

#27 16-11-11 05:18:31

Re: The pill and libido

#28 16-11-11 05:33:26

Re: The pill and libido

#29 16-11-11 05:43:39

Re: The pill and libido

#30 16-11-11 05:49:14

Re: The pill and libido

#31 16-11-11 05:58:39

Re: The pill and libido

#32 16-11-11 06:05:20

Re: The pill and libido

#33 16-11-11 06:25:20

Re: The pill and libido

#34 16-11-11 06:25:26

Re: The pill and libido

#35 16-11-11 06:34:34

Re: The pill and libido

#36 16-11-11 06:54:31

Re: The pill and libido

#37 16-11-11 07:05:02

Re: The pill and libido

#38 17-11-11 00:44:18

Re: The pill and libido

#39 17-11-11 01:19:43

Re: The pill and libido

#40 17-11-11 02:34:12

Re: The pill and libido

#41 17-11-11 03:03:38

Re: The pill and libido

#42 17-11-11 03:10:46

Re: The pill and libido

#43 17-11-11 04:15:05

Re: The pill and libido

#44 17-11-11 14:26:16

Re: The pill and libido

#45 17-11-11 21:55:20

Re: The pill and libido

#46 17-11-11 22:29:02

Re: The pill and libido

#47 18-11-11 00:22:39

Re: The pill and libido

#48 18-11-11 00:57:03

Re: The pill and libido

#49 18-11-11 03:14:01

Re: The pill and libido

#50 18-11-11 04:24:11

Re: The pill and libido

Board footer