Lounge of Tomorrow

Lounge of Tomorrow (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/index.php)
-   Lounge Lizard (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/forumdisplay.php?f=11)
-   -   Who's your Daddy? (http://74.208.121.111/LoT/showthread.php?t=1816)

Name 08-14-2005 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight
That doesn't exceed the failure rate by as much as you'd think. It exceeds the failure rate with proper useage by a lot, but most evidence shows that a distressingly large number of people don't follow proper useage.

You mean condoms aren't meant to be used to make baloon animals?

Not Afraid 08-14-2005 07:44 PM

Yes! Condoms ARE meant to be used as Balloon Animals - but only past their expiration date. Before then, use them for their first priority - putting the winkey in the bag. ;)

Quote:

That doesn't exceed the failure rate by as much as you'd think. It exceeds the failure rate with proper useage by a lot, but most evidence shows that a distressingly large number of people don't follow proper useage.
Still, you can get pregnant (or impregnant someone) - proper usage or not. Even BCP, used correctly are only 99% effective. I got pregnant on them. You have sex, you could impregnant someone or get pregnant. Short of tubal ligation or abstinance, there is no 100% way to prevent pregnancy. Sex partners should probably be looked at as potential fathers. If you don't want to have their baby - or their abortion - is it worth it for the sex?

I was lucky in my slut period. I don't know anyone who was as active as I was who did not end up with some fine "memory".

Kevy Baby 08-15-2005 03:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by €uroMeinke
...how well do you really know yourself at 18?

I knew my right hand very well at 18.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Afraid
Even BCP, used correctly are only 99% effective. I got pregnant on them.

And GusGus and I have been having unprotected sex for six years and are STILL not pregnant.:mad:

Hmmm... On second thought, maybe we should be having sex with each other...

Ghoulish Delight 08-15-2005 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Not Afraid
Still, you can get pregnant (or impregnant someone) - proper usage or not. Even BCP, used correctly are only 99% effective.

Yes, but Prudence's point was that the 1:25 figure is 4 times the expected pregnency rate of 1%. Her assumption was that that meant that a huge number of people were taking no precautions. In reality, a 4% failure rate is pretty close to (or possibly even less common) what's expected based on most estimates of the rate of improper use of contraception (e.g. forgetting to take today's pill, or not knowing how to put a freaking rubber on correctly). So the high number probably doesn't indicate a particularly large rate of people not protecting themselves as she first assumed.

Ghoulish Delight 08-15-2005 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby
And GusGus and I have been having unprotected sex for six years and are STILL not pregnant.:mad:

Hmmm... On second thought, maybe we should be having sex with each other...

Hmm, you DO seem to have a new dragon every time we see you...and I swear Gratch was trying to give me a link to a lewd picture. The resemblance is uncanny.

Not Afraid 08-15-2005 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevy Baby
And GusGus and I have been having unprotected sex for six years and are STILL not pregnant.:mad:
Hmmm... On second thought, maybe we should be having sex with each other...

Yeah, tell me about it. In my world, BC makes you preggers and lack of BC makes you unable to get pregnant. Whatever.


Quote:

Originally Posted by GD
Yes, but Prudence's point was that the 1:25 figure is 4 times the expected pregnency rate of 1%. Her assumption was that that meant that a huge number of people were taking no precautions. In reality, a 4% failure rate is pretty close to (or possibly even less common) what's expected based on most estimates of the rate of improper use of contraception (e.g. forgetting to take today's pill, or not knowing how to put a freaking rubber on correctly). So the high number probably doesn't indicate a particularly large rate of people not protecting themselves as she first assumed.

Yeah, I loved these types of "facts" when I was slutting it. I would glom on to them like they were gold - until almost everyone I knew either go a disease or got pregnant. Now, years later, I see just how stupid I was to depend on those "facts".

Prudence 08-15-2005 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight
Yes, but Prudence's point was that the 1:25 figure is 4 times the expected pregnency rate of 1%. Her assumption was that that meant that a huge number of people were taking no precautions. In reality, a 4% failure rate is pretty close to (or possibly even less common) what's expected based on most estimates of the rate of improper use of contraception (e.g. forgetting to take today's pill, or not knowing how to put a freaking rubber on correctly). So the high number probably doesn't indicate a particularly large rate of people not protecting themselves as she first assumed.

It's not that I assumed they were taking no precautions, it's that I assumed that people cheating would go out of their way to make sure they took extra special precaution. And I now readily conceed that people, as a rule, are maroons and probably don't do that after all.

Maroons.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:30 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.