posted
I just wanted to point out that Epictetus never clarified what high school in Utah supposedly refused to let a pregnant student walk in graduation but let the guy walk. Fact is, it would be a rare high school in Utah that wouldn't have a pregnant student. And if you're pregnant enough to show under a graduation gown, it's probably in consideration of safety.
Posts: 2010 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
You've confused me totally here, mothertree. How is being pregnant and in a graduation gown, unsafe?
Posts: 9538 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the movie Kinsey his wife had that problem. It got fixed with surgery on her part, but I am sure there are positions that can accomidate for that. I do not have a clear opinion on sex before marriage. I supposed it depends on the individual. I, myself, do not know if I could wait until marriage, but, I also could not have casual sex with any random person either.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I haven't read the whole thread. Just the beginning.
I, personally, am a virgin. Not quite unusual for a 15-year-old, but that's not my point. I believe that I am mature enough to have sex with a girl my age. I am hetrosexual, and speak from a hetrosexual point of view, not regarding my weird religious belief. I don't deal with sexual intercourse [yet], though, for a few very simple reasons:
1) There's no-one who seems to be interested in me sexually.
2) There's no-one I seem to be interested in sexually.
3) I know I'm ready for the sex itself, but that does not mean that I can fully handle any consequence that might arise. Though I don't have AIDS or nother form of STD (unless I was secretly drugged and secretly raped anally by an infected person during my sleep - which I do not recall), I'd rather not fiddle with biology. Before having sex for the first time, I want to be examined for STD, and my partner too: for STD and chance of pregnancy. Even then, I want a pill and a condom. That moment isn't here, though, so it's rather impractical at the moment.
4) I don't want to hurt a virgin by penetration. I heard it's quite painful breaking through the virgin layer of skin; also, I don't believe that there's a point in having sex unless you have penetration - otherwise it's just "foreplay".
5) While the thought of physical pleasure can seem tempting, it's not worth the hassle involved around it. At least not at the moment.
quote: 2) There's no-one I seem to be interested in sexually.
That's interesting for a 15 year old male to say. Are you really saying that you don't physically desire to sleep with anyone?
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe not a particular person? If I remember correctly, a 15-year-old boy sort of has a disfocused desire to sleep with everyonePosts: 1539 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was an extremely late bloomer. I never even got interested in anyone that age until I was about 18 or 19... Still, I wish I had at least... kissed when I was 15... and... dated Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
And despite my facetious comment, my feelings as a kid weren't actually focused on the act of sex, itself. This may have been because my religion made it a non-issue; I'm not sure. But my feelings were much more focused on admiring women VISUALLY than on DOING certain things with them.
Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Syn, are you saying you didn't get interested in 15-year-olds until you were 19? I think they have laws against that ... Posts: 1907 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by A Rat Named Dog: Syn, are you saying you didn't get interested in 15-year-olds until you were 19? I think they have laws against that ...
Never got interested in men or women until I was 18-19. That is just bizarre. Most of the kids I knew in junior high school were completely hormonal and kept reading romance novels at me all the time.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
This was back in... Junior High school 72, Catherine and count Basie. They drove me crazy doing that... All those stupid scenes.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
Dkw is indeed correct. You can, on the pill, miss one pill and as long as you take it when you remember and take the next pill the next day as usual you are still covered.
Incidentally, I didn't just bring my situtation up from a position of ignorance. I brought it up as someone who has read every instruction book for the last 6 years and is fully aware of how to correctly take the pill. Also as a daughter of a GP who has left out no detail in instructing me as to contraception.
Sorry I didn't provide a link in the first place.
Also, I doubt either myself or my husband are infertile. But thanks for asking.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:How is being pregnant and in a graduation gown, unsafe?
It's not the gown, it's the slip'n'slide they ride past the principal as they get their diplomas.
Angiomorphism, I would not marry a man who wanted to "audition" me sexually. As others have noted, there is no guarantee that sex will always be possible. True, many married couples are willing to work out problems that they would not have tolerated when dating. However, there would always be that insecurity, the fear of abandonment if for some reason I was not fulfilling my hypothetical husband's sexual needs.
One potential argument for having pre-marital sex is to practice with someone who has more experience. I wonder if it's better to have someone to learn from. Are there things you can't figure out from books? Is having sex with someone equally inexperienced funny and enjoyable--or just painful? Sure, people will learn eventually, but some might be put off if their first couple of experiences are unpleasant.
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:It's not the gown, it's the slip'n'slide they ride past the principal as they get their diplomas.
See, now, THAT would make the graduation ceremony far more interesting.
*goes to see how the IU School of Music feels about adding a slip'n'slide to the graduation ceremony*
Posts: 4077 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Storm Saxon, I've never been interested in any specific person sexually; well, I probably was, but in the same ratio of it to sexual desire as a crush is to falling in love. In other words, maybe a visual admiration, but no real desire for sex.
Puppy, interesting thought, but whenever I get a feeling "hey, she's hot", I just think objectively about it again. I don't let physical urges get to my mind more than needed.
KoM, masturbation, IMO, is not proper sex. All it means is that your palm is a virgin no-more. Masturbation is foreplay, not the "hardcore" (excuse my term) itself.
quote: ...romance novels...
"As in Sir Hapner's daily/weekly/monthly (whatever!) multi-volumed novel 'Playboy'. The text is okay, but the true profundity comes in th form of fantastic illustrations."
Posts: 358 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Haloed Silhouette: 4) I don't want to hurt a virgin by penetration. I heard it's quite painful breaking through the virgin layer of skin; also, I don't believe that there's a point in having sex unless you have penetration - otherwise it's just "foreplay".
5) While the thought of physical pleasure can seem tempting, it's not worth the hassle involved around it. At least not at the moment.
Good for you for waiting till you have more maturity.
Don't denigrate foreplay--often, it's the best part, especially if you define it as "everything but penetration." Of course there's a point in having sex without penetration. There are many reasons for avoiding penetration.
Finally, the pain of virgins can vary. If the girl is willing and the guy is careful and considerate, it can be minimized though. And, it's a neccesary pain, at some point, unless the girl wants to die a virgin. That and the pain of childbirth and other uniqely female pains and tribulations are sacrifices women make for the continuation of humankind, and for their own sakes. Men have our own sacrifices.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
OK, I knew I was opening up a real can of worms with that comment. Off the top of my head: lower life expectancy than women, more risk of job-related death and disability, higher rates of suicide, heart disease, etc.
We all have our crosses to bear. Some are heavier than others. But the important thing is to bear yours with dignity, not force it off onto others (which I am often guilty of, including later today, to my shame.)
And helping others with their burdens when you can. /preachy tone
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
Dkw is indeed correct. You can, on the pill, miss one pill and as long as you take it when you remember and take the next pill the next day as usual you are still covered.
Incidentally, I didn't just bring my situtation up from a position of ignorance. I brought it up as someone who has read every instruction book for the last 6 years and is fully aware of how to correctly take the pill. Also as a daughter of a GP who has left out no detail in instructing me as to contraception.
Sorry I didn't provide a link in the first place.
Also, I doubt either myself or my husband are infertile. But thanks for asking.
Touchy? I didn't accuse you of being infertile, I just said you don't know why you haven't gotten pregnant. Could be luck, could be infertility, could be perfect birth control use, or any number of other things. But having never been pregnant, you can't definitively say you can get pregnant.
I'm just saying that you're in no position to totally shoot down a statement about the time of day you take the pill, just because you've never gotten pregnant. I don't know whether those numbers are right, because I've never seen the data they used to get those numbers. Any stats people here will back me up when I say you can take data and get pretty much any numbers you want out of it.
I do believe this, because it makes sense -
"If birth control pills are taken correctly, they're 99 percent effective at preventing pregnancy. Delaying or missing even one pill significantly reduces their effectiveness."
Surely your dad covered this in one of his contraception seminars.
In my case, anyway, I prefer to err on the side of caution, especially in this area. I would also hate for a teenager, or someone not as careful as you, to read your post and say "My friend on the internet takes her birth control whenever she feels like it, and she's never gotten pregnant, so I'll do that too. That's much easier than remembering to take it every day at the same time." (not saying that you take your BC whenever you feel like it, but someone might come away with that impression)
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Course, the birth control patch is quite effective at making sure women don't forget their medication during those three weeks the patch is active. You have to check and make sure the patch hasn't fallen off, but it's quite good.
I also know a girl who gets the depo provera shot every 3 months. You're pretty darned well covered for those three months (after the initial period).
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
BTW I'm pretty sure that the different formulations in the birth control pills determines how long you can go after the 24 hr period and remain safe. As one practitioner noted to me, there are more kinds of birth control pills than kinds of beer (exaggeration, of course). For example, Lessina says that if taken within 28 hours, no other protection is indicated. However, Yasmin says that if you take two pills at the 48 mark, you're still protected.
Posts: 1261 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
This is Imogen, not Scythrop. He has certainly never taken birth control in his life. Accidentally left it logged on.
***
quote: Surely your dad covered this in one of his contraception seminars.
My mother.
(Funny the assumptions people make. )
Look, all I was taking issue with was an unsubtantiated figure that does not match up with all I have read and been told on the subject.
As I said, I should have provided the link in the first place, rather than my own experience. I guess the statement just seemed so incredibly untrue to me I didn't think other people would demand statistics.
I agree, no-one should be complacent about it. I certainly do not take my pills when I feel like it. But it is untrue to say as a general statement not taking them within a 3 hour period reduces their effectiveness to 70%.
As dabbler said, there are different types of pills, each with different hormone concentrations and percentages. What pill a woman is taking will determine procedures if she has missed a pill. Every woman should talk to her GP and read the instructions fully.
**
El JT, I think the reason I am getting prickly is because I *know* about this subject.
Correct me if I am wrong but you are a guy who has never taken birth control pills in his life, let alone had an appointment with a doctor as to their effective use. You haven't read the little information booklets that come with each prescription and you haven't had consultations about differing pills, their effectiveness, side-effects and how they work. You don't really know.
Yet you seem determined to ignore those of us who have, preferring to believe what makes sense to you. Why?
Posts: 466 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
For the record, when I made the comment requesting statistics or links or whatever it was I said all the way back whenever that was, I wasn't requesting or demanding it of you, Imogen. It was directed, actually, at "facts" that were offered without proof or backup going back to the first page that no one then asked for backup on, either. Which surprised me, because, after all, at Hatrack, I've never seen anyone get away with providing "facts" and not being called on it before.
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Correct me if I am wrong but you are a guy who has never taken birth control pills in his life, let alone had an appointment with a doctor as to their effective use. You haven't read the little information booklets that come with each prescription and you haven't had consultations about differing pills, their effectiveness, side-effects and how they work. You don't really know.
It's always a bad idea to start a sentence directed at me with the words "Correct me if I'm wrong."
I'll be civil though. Your first sentence is right. I am a guy, and I've never taken birth control pills (unless you count the sugar placebos).
Wrong about the rest though. Two things you should know about me:
1)I've had about 6 close friends and two ex-girlfriends who are or were on birth control over the last five years. So I know all about the side effects, the different pills, and even which female hormones are involved. I know more about birth control than I ever wanted to, and way more than any man needs to.
2)I read everything that's printed in english that I come into contact with. I can't control it. I've read the prescription insert on more than one package of birth control. I'm the guy who reads food labels (including ingredients), the disclaimers on TV commercials (professional driver on closed course), CD liner notes, receipts, bumper stickers, newspaper classifieds, and friends' cars' owner's manuals.
So I actually do know. If I didn't know, I would have kept quiet. That's a policy of mine.
"The Pearl Index[1] is often used to compare the effectiveness of various methods of contraception. It is expressed as the "number of pregnancies in 100 normally fertile women over the period of one year". Each method of birth control has two Pearl index numbers:
* method effectiveness: is the Pearl index number for use under perfect conditons. The method effectiveness Pearl index for the Pill has been measured as low as 0.3 and as high as 1.25, which means that under ideal conditions, anywhere from 0.3 to 1.25 out of 100 users will become pregnant during one year of perfect use (Pearl index = 0.3 to 1.25).
* user effectiveness: is the Pearl index number for use under typical conditions. The user effectiveness measured by the Pearl index for the Pill has been measured as low as 2.15 and as high as 8.0, which means that anywhere from 2.15 to 8.0 out of 100 women will become pregnant during the first year of typical use (Pearl index = 2.15 to 8.0). [2] [3]
Many women occasionally forget to take the Pill daily, impairing its effectiveness. Correct use of the pill usually implies taking it every day at the same hour for 21 days, followed by a pause of seven days."
I was staggered to see that 8 out of a hundred could expect to get pregnant in their first year of birth control use. That's if they never miss a pill.
So don't assume that because I disagree with you means that I ignored you. If it comes down to my own intuition against the opinion of a stranger, I am always gonna go with my intuition. It's proven itself right too often for too long. I would hope that you would do the same.
Anyway, we can agree to disagree. After all, we agree on the things that matter.
Sorry for assuming it was your dad that was the doctor. That was incredibly sexist of me, and I feel stupid for not even considering that you mom could be the GP. It's crazy how deeply ingrained those stereotypes are.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Out of curiousity, are there statistics on how effective the Pill is when taken without a seven day break?
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Shig, I have been told that it is still just as effective.
(And have been advised by my GP to do so in various circumstances).
Makes sense when you think about it - instead of having a break from the hormones, you just keep 'em topped up.
In fact, from the site EL JT linked to:
quote: It is possible for a woman to skip menstruation and still remain protected against conception by skipping these pills in the cycle.
***
El JT - ok.
I am sorry for assuming you had a lower level of knowledge than you did. Call it even?
But there is one thing -
quote: I am a guy, and I've never taken birth control pills (unless you count the sugar placebos).
What, you were just curious? Needed a sugar fix? Bored?
Each to their own, I guess.
Incidentally, I find the 8/100 thing shocking as well. I wonder if they took into account other factors that can impair effectiveness. A very common but little known one is Vitamin C. Over 1000 mg a day can prevent effective absorption of the pill. So, no mega multi-Vitamins if you're on the OCP!
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Imogen, if you don't mind, what circumstances? (I'm doing it because of severe pain due to endometriosis...no bleeding, no pain).
Posts: 3546 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
Convenience mostly - once during my TEE (end of year 12 exams), once when I went to India and Pakistan, once on a hiking, take-in, take-out trip.
Of course, those have been the times I have been told by my GP to skip the sugar pills. In reality, I probably skip every two in a row and have a period every third or so. I don't have endometriosis but I do get pretty bad pains and nausea, so the less I have to go through it, the happier I am.
[Edit - ack! Not again! Yep, Imogen here. Poor Tony. People will start wondering about his ... unique problems. ]
Posts: 466 | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged |
Also, my natural cycle is quite long - about 5-6 weeks.
I see no reason I should change that to every 3 weeks just because that's what the manufacturers decided was normal. Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I know more about birth control than I ever wanted to, and way more than any man needs to.
Um, if you're going to be sexually active, what makes you think you don't need to know about birth control? Are you expecting the responsibility to fall on the woman's shoulders?
Unfortunately, that seems to be a common attitude.
Shigosei - have you tried depo provera? No periods, one shot every three months, nothing to remember. But some women (me included) experience weight gain on it.
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:What, you were just curious? Needed a sugar fix? Bored?
Did it to mess with one of my buddies. I set him up with a sentence like "It doesn't hurt guys to take birth control pills, I've done it before." He, predictably, called me on it, and I took one of the sugar pills to freak him out.
quote:
quote: I know more about birth control than I ever wanted to, and way more than any man needs to.
Um, if you're going to be sexually active, what makes you think you don't need to know about birth control? Are you expecting the responsibility to fall on the woman's shoulders?
Wow. If this thread has taught me anything, it's that no one will read a statement about birth control as it's written. Why should they, when it's so much fun to read extra meaning into it. Then you can throw out veiled accusations.
Quid - browse the previous 4 pages of so of this thread for my feelings on birth control. Jeez, just read the post you quoted in its entirety and it should be pretty clear that I think knowing about birth control is pretty important. Specifically, that sentence was written to convey the information that guys don't need to know which hormones are worked on, or the exact method of conception the pill blocks. They only need to know how to take it, the side effects, and the risks. Being able to sketch out the chemical reactions doesn't make it work any better.
Posts: 5462 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
El JT, I DID read the thread in its entirety, and I also read that post in particular in its entirety. It's when statements like that are made that I wonder about attitudes. If you're not communicating exactly what you meant by that statment in an effective manner, don't blame it on the person reading it and potentially misunderstanding it. For example, that you may have meant
quote:Specifically, that sentence was written to convey the information that guys don't need to know which hormones are worked on, or the exact method of conception the pill blocks. They only need to know how to take it, the side effects, and the risks.
Was not at all obvious from the statement I quoted:
quote:I know more about birth control than I ever wanted to, and way more than any man needs to.
Instead, that second statement comes off exactly as I indicated in my prior post.
Posts: 8355 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
it's probably just my hideous insecurities speaking, but if my husband (boyfriend) posted on an internet forum that i wasn't the best sex of his life and never would be, i would smack him hard in the mouth when I saw him next.
Good thing Christy's probably a lot more secure than me :-)
Posts: 8741 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why lie? *shrug* I've dated lots of women who do certain things individually better than Christy does them -- from making sandwiches to playing the French Horn to laying brick. (Note: these are not euphemisms for anything.) And thanks to a fairly shallow phase in which I spent several years a decade ago, the bar is set rather high when it comes to the mechanics of the sex act.
I hope my wife recognizes that even though she isn't as good a bricklayer as the professional mason I dated, I still made the conscious decision that there were other things more important to a successful marriage that she did much, much better than the competition. And I'd like to think that I tell her often enough what those things are -- and describe in enough detail how much I love her, and how grateful I am for her presence in my life -- that she does not erroneously believe, even for a second, that I regret not having married a better bricklayer.
I'm being more blunt about this than is my usual approach because a misconception is running through this thread -- that sex can be safely assumed to be some magical, mystical, perfect thing that someone in a perfect marriage can expect to enjoy.
Bah. It's not such a big deal. It's not the foundation of my marriage, and I doubt it's the foundation of any successful marriage. Moreover, I think the percentage of happily married people who'd describe sex with their spouse as mindblowingly perfect is vanishingly small.
But here's the secret: sex doesn't have to be mindblowingly perfect. More importantly, how good sex feels with someone is NOT a reliable indicator of how much you like that person, much less how compatible a spouse that person would be. I think a LOT of people haven't figured this out yet, and leave spouses who are otherwise perfect in every detail because they conclude that better sex must be symptomatic of a potentially better relationship.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Embarrassed]](redface.gif)
