NationStates Jolt Archive

Back when I was single, I sometimes used to wonder if I'd ever risk unprotected sex with someone I barely knew. Luckily I never really had to make that decision - I'm no babe-magnet so I usually only got sex once I was in a long-term romantic relationship with someone I'd gotten to know really well. "One Nighters" were not something I ever really had offered to me.

I do wonder though what risks I might have been willing to take if I'd been the kind of guy lots of women wanted to shag at the drop of a hat. I'd like to think I'd be strong enough and responsible enough to always use protection - but who knows? I've been known to take risks in other areas of my life once in awhile - especially when I was younger.

No way, thats just goddamn insane.

I would tend to say no on safety and moral grounds, but then again, I haven't ever been put in that situation, so I can't absolutely say for sure.

If she was absolutly amazingly beautiful, then yes. After, I would procure a morning after pill and make her take it.

If she was absolutly amazingly beautiful, then yes. After, I would procure a morning after pill and make her take it.

Um, I was referring to the risk of HIV/AIDS and other STDs. The morning-after pill won't help you against that. And yes, some absolutely amazingly beautiful women can kill you with STDs - right?

STDs are the hidden killer; there are many more of them than HIV/AIDS, and most people don't know crap about them. If you knew how easy it is to get some of these (you don't even have to have sex to get some of these), then you would say 'holy fuck no!'

No way, thats just goddamn insane.

Garaj Mahal - What exactly is your obsession with sex? It's starting to become worrisome. You're an adult man according to you married. I have told you before the majority of players on this site are minors.. Yet thread after thread that you post is of a sexual nature. Why?

Only if I knew they were disease free completely, and then I would make them take a morning after pill. But, that's doubtful to happen soon as I am a minor.

ive always had unprotected sex i think ive only used a condom about 5 times in my life but thats me, a risk taker.

I wouldn't have unprotected sex even with someone I knew. Unless of course we were married and the intention was to have kids. But that's beside the point.

Been there done that.

I was usually pretty decent at "judging" people. However, maybe it was the age of AIDS because each girl did ask about the amount of my partners and mentioned theirs.

I was lucky I guess......

If she was absolutly amazingly beautiful, then yes. After, I would procure a morning after pill and make her take it.

Um, I was referring to the risk of HIV/AIDS and other STDs. The morning-after pill won't help you against that. And yes, some absolutely amazingly beautiful women can kill you with STDs - right?

No shit, but the pill removes one of those risks, in my mind one of the biggest ones.

Hell no dude! I only stick my pork in the clean people. I use a rubber sheet if they look the least bit dirty...even if they look clean i will.

I might if I'm drunk. But otherwise no.

Not unprotected.

Garaj Mahal - What exactly is your obsession with sex? It's starting to become worrisome. You're an adult man according to you married. I have told you before the majority of players on this site are minors.. Yet thread after thread that you post is of a sexual nature. Why?

I would call this thread far more about public health and attitudes than sex, wouldn't you? Disease is not a titillating subject - I frankly think it "worrisome" that you'd find it so.

We constantly hear that HIV/AIDS rates are still increasing. This means that human attitudes are playing a big role in that increase. Why is there anything questionable about wanting to find out about peoples' attitudes? I'm genuinely far more interested in what goes on in peoples' heads than below their belts.

Human behaviour IS endlesslessly fascinating. That means *all* sides of human behaviour. And everybody here stands to learn something valuable from discussing all sides of it. People of any age might well learn something that will save his/her life!

Steph, everybody on this site probably knows I'm a married guy - I mention it all the time in threads including right at the beginning of this one. I love being married and I like telling people how how great marriage is. My wife reads my posts all the time and has always been very supportive of what I have to say. To keep things open, I've never - not once - sent a message privately to anyone except for yourself.

You accuse me of always posting things of a sexual nature. Go look at all my threads though and you'll see that by far most of them are NOT about sex at all. And even those that are, are not graphic or disgusting in any way - they are mostly kind, earnest and well-meant. They are perfectly suitable for anybody.

This is the second time you've hinted that I'm some kind of old perv lurking around. I FIND THIS INCREDIBLY UNJUST, INSULTING AND HURTFUL. And it's so totally wrong!!

You know what an obsessive is? Somebody who is always imagining inpropriety, perversion & dirt in the most innocuous and harmless discussion. Somebody who would ban everything that sets off some deep-seated psychological issue they have never sought professional help for.

Before this thread gets locked "from above", why don't we let some others express *their* opinions on this thread and even some others I've posted? Or do you have the courage to let this thread live?

I've had unprotected sex, but then again, I was married. I can't even say there were any guarantees there. With someone I barely knew? NO. That is taking your life into your own hands. I'd just as soon play russian roulette. It's crazy. It's not just HIV/AIDS either. Did you know that Syphilis is making a comeback? How about herpes? Chlamydia? All of them can affect you for life. Don't take the chance. Even protected sex isn't 100% safe.

I wouldn't have it with a total stranger, maybe a friend who I knew was on the pill.

I wouldn't have it with a total stranger, maybe a friend who I knew was on the pill.

I wouldn't have it with a total stranger, maybe a friend who I knew was on the pill.

My favorite form of protection is called 'not screwing every random person I meet.' :p
So I guess my answer is no.

ive always had unprotected sex i think ive only used a condom about 5 times in my life but thats me, a risk taker.

I'm a female, and i think unprotected sex is supposed to scare us more... but i don't see anything wrong with it... i've never had a guy use a condom. So sorry Sadistic, i'm a little more of a risk taker

I hate condoms. Not on moral/philosophical ground, but simply due to the fact they remove any excitemente for me from the act, and make it feel mechanical and boring. I was once in a relationship with a girl for 6 months and used a condom everytime because she had problems with the pill... and our sex life went from mediocre to me being bored senseless pretty quickly. Since then ive used it a few times, with a few girls. But at the end of the day id rather not have sex with the girl, or just settle for oral, than use a condom.

LOL, so the short answer to my long-winded reply is, Yes i would have unprotected sex.

[I'm a female, and i think unprotected sex is supposed to scare us more... but i don't see anything wrong with it... i've never had a guy use a condom.

What if not using a condom led to your getting a fatal STD, then you passed that on to another partner and they died? Wouldn't that indicate "something wrong" with unprotected sex?

Please don't think I'm attacking you or being a prude - I just wonder if "risk takers" thought about that issue.

Garaj Mahal - What exactly is your obsession with sex? It's starting to become worrisome. You're an adult man according to you married. I have told you before the majority of players on this site are minors.. Yet thread after thread that you post is of a sexual nature. Why?

Was that nessecary?

It's the people who think there's nothing wrong with unprotected sex who are making STDs spread like they are. It's why we can't seem to get rid of Syphilis, and people are apathetic to the risk of getting AIDS.

I might if I were drunk, but otherwise, probably not.

No way Jose. :D

if i worked in the porn industry, where everyone is required to get tested all the time, then yes, because chances are when you're starting out you don't know your partners.

other than that remote possibility, no, i wouldn't.

Luckily I never really had to make that decision -

Luckily, I have a different view of "luck"

if i worked in the porn industry, where everyone is required to get tested all the time, then yes, because chances are when you're starting out you don't know your partners.

other than that remote possibility, no, i wouldn't.

AAARGH! Are you cracked? Don't you read the news? They just had a huge AIDS scare in the porn industry in Hollywood. A moratorium on shooting for six weeks, and they found about four people in the industry HIV positive. They don't use condoms in porn because it "spoils the look", but it also seems to have caused the terminal illnesses of four people. Wake up.

if i worked in the porn industry, where everyone is required to get tested all the time, then yes, because chances are when you're starting out you don't know your partners.

other than that remote possibility, no, i wouldn't.

AAARGH! Are you cracked? Don't you read the news? They just had a huge AIDS scare in the porn industry in Hollywood. A moratorium on shooting for six weeks, and they found about four people in the industry HIV positive. They don't use condoms in porn because it "spoils the look", but it also seems to have caused the terminal illnesses of four people. Wake up.

no, i know about that, and that one lady died or whatever. i am aware of the risks involved. that said, if you're in porn, you have to accept the risks and keep on truckin'.

again: remote possibility. i have no desire to be a porn star.

Hell no!


thats what 24 hour shops are for.

I bet there are talented women, or so I've heard, that could put a condom on you without you even knowing. You'd have sex thinking you'd gone through the whole thing without one, and not know the difference. It's psychological, friend. Just remember that.

If you don't want to become a porn star, you probably won't. There are plenty of eager folk willing to take your place on the filming lots of California, and I don't think the money is that great, either. Not for actors, anyway. Producers, well, that's another story...

With regard to the original question, I have been known to be impulsive and make mistakes I regret later. Fortunately for me, none of these mistakes have turned out lethally, at least so far, but do as I say, not as I've done in my shady past. Wear one unless you really know what you're doing and have a good reason not to.

By all means, make out in the church parking lot, steal away to the beach at night to play around with sixsomes of other horny adolescents, just use all feasible protection when you do. Please.

Can you imagine how you'd react if a stranger came up to your house in five years to tell you "Here, she's your daughter, you take care of her now, I can't." or "So you're the son of a bleep who gave my daughter AIDS?" or "By the way, did you know you're a carrier?" I've been lucky, I've dodged these... at least, I think I've dodged these.

I could, of course, be wrong on some counts there. Maybe in another few years I'll get surprised.

hell no.

I'm with Tahar Joblis on this one. It's russian roulette. You're lucky if you dodge every bullet. Wear protection. It might not be much, but it's better than nothing.

Look, contrary to the false propaganda you get from your freinds, the only thing condoms stop is sperm. They can't stop viruses. Not even latex condoms can do that.
There have been a lot of people who got STDs even though they used latex condoms.

Look, contrary to the false propaganda you get from your freinds, the only thing condoms stop is sperm. They can't stop viruses. Not even latex condoms can do that.
There have been a lot of people who got STDs even though they used latex condoms.

Geez, could have sworn it was my doctor telling me that "propaganda."

And yes, the safest way is through abstinence. :(

i've been dating my bf for going on 10 months. we've had sex without a condom like 5 times total. it's never been completely unprotected, i'm always on the pill...
but yeah, i would never, ever have unprotected sex with a stranger.
i wouldn't even have sex with a stranger...

Look, contrary to the false propaganda you get from your freinds, the only thing condoms stop is sperm. They can't stop viruses. Not even latex condoms can do that.
There have been a lot of people who got STDs even though they used latex condoms.

Sorry, buddy. I'd rather err on the side of caution then. So they do nothing? Well I'd rather take my chances with a condom than without. I'd rather believe that stopping sperm was stopping some of the pathogens. Sure, people can get herpes and genital warts and crabs with a condom. Still, it's better than nothing. Pregnancy is a risk too. I sure as hell don't want to have sex with a stranger and end up having a baby for whom I can't name a father. What if he has diabetes or something I should know about? Even if it only stops sperm, it's good for something.

Look, contrary to the false propaganda you get from your freinds, the only thing condoms stop is sperm. They can't stop viruses. Not even latex condoms can do that.
There have been a lot of people who got STDs even though they used latex condoms.

actually, they did a study of couples where one was infected with hiv. in every couple that used a condom every time, not one passed the infection on to their partener.
the only thing condoms really don't stop is herpes. but that's skin to skin contact.

Look, contrary to the false propaganda you get from your freinds, the only thing condoms stop is sperm. They can't stop viruses. Not even latex condoms can do that.
There have been a lot of people who got STDs even though they used latex condoms.

Sorry, buddy. I'd rather err on the side of caution then. So they do nothing? Well I'd rather take my chances with a condom than without. I'd rather believe that stopping sperm was stopping some of the pathogens. Sure, people can get herpes and genital warts and crabs with a condom. Still, it's better than nothing. Pregnancy is a risk too. I sure as hell don't want to have sex with a stranger and end up having a baby for whom I can't name a father. What if he has diabetes or something I should know about? Even if it only stops sperm, it's good for something.
Sorry buddy, but I'd prefer they abstain and not do it at all.

Sorry buddy, but I'd prefer they abstain and not do it at all.

Hey, agreed, but we can only advise, Shangia, and I don't feel it's realistic to believe that people would have that much sense. It's more of a damage control issue now than a prevention issue.

Sorry buddy, but I'd prefer they abstain and not do it at all.

whoop-dee-do!
i don't care if you don't screw until you're married. don't be trying to force others into doing the same.

I didn't see an answer fitting one that I would choose. I can only say that I've done it before, and been lucky. I generally stay in a relationship for an extended period of time, so I can be fairly certain that I am safe and so is my partner. It's the best idea to remain safe by knowing who you're sleeping with and using a condom, even if you do know them. But if you're not going to take the time to know them, at least be smart enough to wrap one on. ;)


Greywollffe has spoken...

http://67.18.37.14/124/125/upload/av-476.jpg


King of Spades (http://198.70.62.5/home.asp)
It's a Warlock's Life (http://tswarlock.blogspot.com/)
Warlock's Sanctuary (http://www.angelfire.com/realm2/tomwarlock/)

Sorry buddy, but I'd prefer they abstain and not do it at all.

Hey, agreed, but we can only advise, Shangia, and I don't feel it's realistic to believe that people would have that much sense. It's more of a damage control issue now than a prevention issue.
Most people are already abstaining until marriage these days anyway.
And they are doing it on their own.
You just have to have faith in people to make the right decisions.

Sorry buddy, but I'd prefer they abstain and not do it at all.

whoop-dee-do!
i don't care if you don't screw until you're married. don't be trying to force others into doing the same.
Wow, what are you? some kind of paranoid Schizophrenic conspiracy theorist?
Who said anything about forcing people?

most people aren't abstaining. what kind of stats are you making up?

they did a study where teenagers pledged abstianance until marriage. 85% of those who took the pledge broke it and 98% of those who didn't had sex before marriage.

most people who wait until marriage are more likely to jump into a marriage early and thus end up with a divorce or a completely disfunctional marriage more often as well.

Wow, what are you? some kind of paranoid Schizophrenic conspiracy theorist?
Who said anything about forcing people?

LMAO!!! I thought I read forced, too. Ok, chill out. I was just kidding. I'm no paranoid.

Did you hear that?? LMAO!!!!


Greywollffe has spoken...

http://67.18.37.14/124/125/upload/av-476.jpg


King of Spades (http://198.70.62.5/home.asp)
It's a Warlock's Life (http://tswarlock.blogspot.com/)
Warlock's Sanctuary (http://www.angelfire.com/realm2/tomwarlock/)

Most people are already abstaining until marriage these days anyway.
And they are doing it on their own.
You just have to have faith in people to make the right decisions.

And here I thought that was just a fable. :?

It seems to me that the kids who are having sex seem to be getting younger and younger.

Wow, what are you? some kind of paranoid Schizophrenic conspiracy theorist?
Who said anything about forcing people?

yes, that's exactly it...

the way you posted seemed to be asserting some kind of superiority over another poster.

Most people are already abstaining until marriage these days anyway.
And they are doing it on their own.
You just have to have faith in people to make the right decisions.

And here I thought that was just a fable. :?

It seems to me that the kids who are having sex seem to be getting younger and younger.
Some of them are.
You have places with 10 years olds getting it on. Then you also have what is called designer sex among kids at the mall.

Designer sex? Is that for those who can't afford their clothes? Sleep with the designer for a discount.


Greywollffe has spoken...

http://67.18.37.14/124/125/upload/av-476.jpg


King of Spades (http://198.70.62.5/home.asp)
It's a Warlock's Life (http://tswarlock.blogspot.com/)
Warlock's Sanctuary (http://www.angelfire.com/realm2/tomwarlock/)

I would have unprotected sex with someone I didnt know. But I might think twice about having unprotected sex with someone I barely know.

Sorry buddy, but I'd prefer they abstain and not do it at all.

Hey, agreed, but we can only advise, Shangia, and I don't feel it's realistic to believe that people would have that much sense. It's more of a damage control issue now than a prevention issue.
Most people are already abstaining until marriage these days anyway.
And they are doing it on their own.
You just have to have faith in people to make the right decisions.

um, I don't know where you got that, because most people are definitely not abstaining until married, from what I've seen.

Sorry buddy, but I'd prefer they abstain and not do it at all.

Hey, agreed, but we can only advise, Shangia, and I don't feel it's realistic to believe that people would have that much sense. It's more of a damage control issue now than a prevention issue.
Most people are already abstaining until marriage these days anyway.
And they are doing it on their own.
You just have to have faith in people to make the right decisions.

um, I don't know where you got that, because most people are definitely not abstaining until married, from what I've seen.
No most are not, if you look at numbers but they are a slim majority.

Sorry buddy, but I'd prefer they abstain and not do it at all.

Hey, agreed, but we can only advise, Shangia, and I don't feel it's realistic to believe that people would have that much sense. It's more of a damage control issue now than a prevention issue.
Most people are already abstaining until marriage these days anyway.
And they are doing it on their own.
You just have to have faith in people to make the right decisions.

um, I don't know where you got that, because most people are definitely not abstaining until married, from what I've seen.
No most are not, if you look at numbers but they are a slim majority.

but you just said most...

and as i mentioned earlier with the abstinance pledge study... yeah, it's not a slim majority.

Designer sex? Is that for those who can't afford their clothes? Sleep with the designer for a discount.


Greywollffe has spoken...

http://67.18.37.14/124/125/upload/av-476.jpg


King of Spades (http://198.70.62.5/home.asp)
It's a Warlock's Life (http://tswarlock.blogspot.com/)
Warlock's Sanctuary (http://www.angelfire.com/realm2/tomwarlock/)
No. Designer sex is when a 16 year old girl will go to the mall with her friends and they would have sex with people for money just so they can buy expensive shoes, clothes, purses, you name it.
It's mostly middle class white females that are doing this in middle class neighborhoods.
What they do is they find a small corner or cranny and their friends act as watch outs while the girl has sex with guys or women who can be 17 or 45.
It is a very unfortunate and extremely disturbing trend.
But no one seems to care enough about the problem to do anything about it.
The scary part is that you actually have girls as young as 12 doing it.

Sorry buddy, but I'd prefer they abstain and not do it at all.

whoop-dee-do!
i don't care if you don't screw until you're married. don't be trying to force others into doing the same.
Wow, what are you? some kind of paranoid Schizophrenic conspiracy theorist?
Who said anything about forcing people?

This reminds me of a Dr. Laura clip where a listener was talking about being ridiculed for recommending abstinence.

There was a study following up on counties five years after introducing abstinence pledges. The higher rate of pledges corresponded to higher STD rates in the same population 5 years later... :shock:

More study is needed, but I don't think that's very solid evidence for the effectiveness of intended abstinence...

Unprotected?

No way.

Protected?

You betcha.

Been there done that.

No pun intended.

What if you lost your memory and had sex with your hand? Would that be considered unprotected sex with something you barely know?

What if you lost your memory and had sex with your hand? Would that be considered unprotected sex with something you barely know?

How could I ever forget my first, and my most frequent love?

I would have unprotected sex with someone I didnt know. But I might think twice about having unprotected sex with someone I barely know.

Huh??

Would not do it with anyone i barely or didnt know either protected or unprotected. I know i could, have been told many a time; however it just isnt for me, not outside a relationship.

Dont really care if other people do though.

Well your honor, I asked her if we should use protection and she just replied: BAAAAA!!!!

Garaj Mahal - What exactly is your obsession with sex? It's starting to become worrisome. You're an adult man according to you married. I have told you before the majority of players on this site are minors.. Yet thread after thread that you post is of a sexual nature. Why?Steph, I don't think this is quite fair. Sex and STDs are major issues, especially among teenagers, so its not only relevant but important. Surely you don't believe in "protecting" people from the facts about sex?

I've had unprotected sex with a person I barely knew in the past. It was dumb, and given a chance to repeat it, I wouldn't do it again. But I was also lucky and dodged a bullet.

My point is, I realize that I got lucky, and that's all it was, plain, stupid, luck. You can't look at a person and just "know" they're clean. That's idiotic and what's more, it's potentially suicidal.

having sex with strangers is just stupid protection or not.

a woman who is willing to have sex with a man she doesnt know is working on some other agenda and its probably not "me so horny"

its a good way to get hooked up with the psychobitch from hell.

people who have sex with strangers are WAY more likely to have all forms of sexually transmitted diseases as well as a host of psychological problems.

its a good way to end up on the jerry springer show on one of his "are you my baby's daddy" shows where there are 6 different possible fathers


that whole abstinence thing probably IS more popular than you realize. most people only have a few (2 or 3) partners before they get married. true thats not utterly abstaining but most of those abstinence fanatics dont count it if you stop having sex, only if you never have it. its possible to be not a virgin AND not a slut.

most people only have a few (2 or 3) partners before they get married.
Is that your opinion or do you have some sort of study to back that number up? I'm not attacking you--I'm really curious about this, because my suspicion, and it's only a suspicion, is that the number is higher among younger people, although it may be lower than it was, say, in the 70s.

Cheating on your wives is the greatest thrill ya’ll ever know, especially if you get them all pregnant. Now ya’ll better believe me, cause I know.

most people only have a few (2 or 3) partners before they get married.
Is that your opinion or do you have some sort of study to back that number up? I'm not attacking you--I'm really curious about this, because my suspicion, and it's only a suspicion, is that the number is higher among younger people, although it may be lower than it was, say, in the 70s.

no but i was reading recently something about the number of lifetime partners that men and women have and the number for men was way lower than what i thought it would be, i dont remember what it was but it was under 10.

i was factoring in the "after you marry the first time" factor as in dr phill's post.

most people only have a few (2 or 3) partners before they get married.
Is that your opinion or do you have some sort of study to back that number up? I'm not attacking you--I'm really curious about this, because my suspicion, and it's only a suspicion, is that the number is higher among younger people, although it may be lower than it was, say, in the 70s.

no but i was reading recently something about the number of lifetime partners that men and women have and the number for men was way lower than what i thought it would be, i dont remember what it was but it was under 10.

i was factoring in the "after you marry the first time" factor as in dr phill's post.I've seen the study you're talking about, I think, and I remember thinking at the time that it might be skewed by the older demographic that was less sexually active before marriage--people like my parents who got married before the sexual revolution hit in the late 60s. It might be interesting to see how that number changes if it's broken down by decade or by generation. I have to admit that of the people I've known in the last ten years--my post-divorce years--that the number of people with fewer than 10 sexual partners is very low. Neither I or my girlfriend fall into that category, and we've been monogamous for the last 4 years.

ya but how many partners did you have before you got married the first time?

i doubt every poll i see about sex, people lie about it even to anonymous polls.

ive always had unprotected sex i think ive only used a condom about 5 times in my life but thats me, a risk taker.

I'm a female, and i think unprotected sex is supposed to scare us more... but i don't see anything wrong with it... i've never had a guy use a condom. So sorry Sadistic, i'm a little more of a risk taker

i see your point

most people only have a few (2 or 3) partners before they get married.
Is that your opinion or do you have some sort of study to back that number up? I'm not attacking you--I'm really curious about this, because my suspicion, and it's only a suspicion, is that the number is higher among younger people, although it may be lower than it was, say, in the 70s.

no but i was reading recently something about the number of lifetime partners that men and women have and the number for men was way lower than what i thought it would be, i dont remember what it was but it was under 10.

i was factoring in the "after you marry the first time" factor as in dr phill's post.

One night stands dont count.

ya but how many partners did you have before you got married the first time?

i doubt every poll i see about sex, people lie about it even to anonymous polls.I was a virgin when I got married, purely for religious reasons. Looking back, I wish that hadn't been the case, since sex was the motivating reason I got married, and I wasn't ready for all the responsibility that goes along with it.

But I was a rarity where I grew up. All of my friends outside the church had lost their virginity years before, and had had multiple sex partners by the time we graduated from high school

No, haha, but mostly because I hate children and never want one of my own.

Oh and I'm a virgin, and I don't doubt I'll stay that way until I get married.

One night stands dont count.Why not? The doctors at the clinic don't care if it's a long term relationship or a one night stand--infected is infected.

And I certainly wouldn't try that statement with my girlfriend--she'd cut my nuts off and store them in a jar. And then she'd smash the jar with a hammer. And then she'd get mad. :lol:

WebMD Medical Reference in collaboration with

"Male" Menopause

Women may not be the only ones who suffer the effects of changing hormones. Some doctors are noticing that their male patients are reporting some of the same symptoms that women experience in menopause.

The medical community is currently debating whether or not men really do go through a natural menopause, but many doctors say their male patients have found relief while taking hormonal therapy.

What Is "Male" Menopause?

Some men may experience a decline in the production of the male hormone testosterone (androgen) as a result of an illness, such as diabetes. This can cause them to experience some of the symptoms that women experience during menopause, such as fatigue, weakness, depression, and sexual problems.

But, unlike menopause in women, "male" menopause is not a natural occurrence associated with aging. The testis, unlike the ovary, does not run out of the substance it needs to make hormones. If a man is healthy, he may be able to make sperm well into his 80s or longer.

However, as a result of disease, subtle changes in the function of the testis may occur as early as 45 to 50 years of age, and more dramatically after the age of 70 in some men.

How Is Male Menopause Diagnosed?

To make the diagnosis, the doctor will perform a physical exam and ask about symptoms. He or she may order other diagnostic tests to rule out any medical problems that may be contributing to the condition.

The doctor will then order a series of blood tests to evaluate hormone levels, including a blood test to measure testosterone levels in the blood. Since testosterone levels vary during the day, several blood tests may need to be done over a period of two to three hours.

Can Male Menopause Be Treated?

If testosterone levels are low, androgen replacement therapy may help relieve symptoms of loss of interest in sex, depression and fatigue. But, as with hormone therapy in women, androgen therapy does carry risks. Replacing male hormones can worsen prostate cancer, and perhaps, atherosclerosis (hardening of the arteries).

most people only have a few (2 or 3) partners before they get married.
Is that your opinion or do you have some sort of study to back that number up? I'm not attacking you--I'm really curious about this, because my suspicion, and it's only a suspicion, is that the number is higher among younger people, although it may be lower than it was, say, in the 70s.

the average number of sexual parteners for a person in their lifetime is 3. well, it was 10 years ago when i was in grade 7 and we had "cup sex" for health class.

It depends, really.

I'm in a committed relationship now, and I obviously have unprotected sex with that one (being as I'm gay)... but with a stranger? If I was inebriated enough, sure, but knowingly and willingly?

I guess, I'm too hypochondrical to put myself in that type of situation...

So men don't start having problems until they are 45. Excellent, I have lots of time left. :lol:

Garaj Mahal - What exactly is your obsession with sex? It's starting to become worrisome. You're an adult man according to you married. I have told you before the majority of players on this site are minors.. Yet thread after thread that you post is of a sexual nature. Why?Steph, I don't think this is quite fair. Sex and STDs are major issues, especially among teenagers, so its not only relevant but important. Surely you don't believe in "protecting" people from the facts about sex?

Hallellujah, somebody sees the light... :)

I wouldn't have unprotected sex with someone I didn't know. I am against one night stands.

However, I would with a girlfriend of 3 months+

Generally,I insist on protection, but I must admit to moments of weakness (when drunk) when it comes to ORAL,When it has been initiated before the question of contraception has arisen.To stop a girl when she is working her magic requires self control of Herculean proportions,if any guys have managed it,more power to you! The risk is smaller,also the woman in question isn't going to get pregnant.And it just feels too damn GOOD!! :D
But seriously, if any of you guys respect your "equipment" and you need some motivation to wear a condom,go to your local library and look at a book on STDs,one with pictures,especially Gonorrhea.
Now imagine thats your "wang" smiling for the camera.Note the fact that it is now every colour of the rainbow & hideously swollen & deformed.
Still want to have sax without a condom?

Garaj Mahal - What exactly is your obsession with sex? It's starting to become worrisome. You're an adult man according to you married. I have told you before the majority of players on this site are minors.. Yet thread after thread that you post is of a sexual nature. Why?Steph, I don't think this is quite fair. Sex and STDs are major issues, especially among teenagers, so its not only relevant but important. Surely you don't believe in "protecting" people from the facts about sex?

Hallellujah, somebody sees the light... :)Thanks. I mean, at the very minimum, you're raising an important and relevant question among a demographic who definately ought to have a clear answer in mind.

You're welcome. I think this thread shows I'm owed a big apology by that other party, but I ain't holding my breath.

most people only have a few (2 or 3) partners before they get married.
Is that your opinion or do you have some sort of study to back that number up? I'm not attacking you--I'm really curious about this, because my suspicion, and it's only a suspicion, is that the number is higher among younger people, although it may be lower than it was, say, in the 70s.

the average number of sexual parteners for a person in their lifetime is 3. well, it was 10 years ago when i was in grade 7 and we had "cup sex" for health class.

3 people............ :lol: :lol: :lol:

Sorry, but i know people who go through 3 people a month, so i cant see this figure as being realistic.

Back on track, the number of people who have STD's is very small compared to the size of the population, so the chances of catching one even without using condoms is statisticly small unless you're a homosexual or a user of intravenous drugs.

Garaj Mahal - What exactly is your obsession with sex? It's starting to become worrisome. You're an adult man according to you married. I have told you before the majority of players on this site are minors.. Yet thread after thread that you post is of a sexual nature. Why?Steph, I don't think this is quite fair. Sex and STDs are major issues, especially among teenagers, so its not only relevant but important. Surely you don't believe in "protecting" people from the facts about sex?

Hallellujah, somebody sees the light... :)
and I think it's obvious that the topic needed to be brought up- seeing as how there are people saying that they don't see any reason for protection. Not to mention the guy who believes in the "condom conspiracy" :roll:
I...like to think I wouldn't...I have had much more unprotected sex than I should have had though (all with people I either knew really well or had been dating a while)
Does it count if you were dating someone for several months, only to realize later that you didn't really know the person? (I don't mean that he was lying or anything, more like you just didn't pay attention to the fact that he was a nazi, etc...)

Generally,I insist on protection, but I must admit to moments of weakness (when drunk) when it comes to ORAL,When it has been initiated before the question of contraception has arisen.To stop a girl when she is working her magic requires self control of Herculean proportions,if any guys have managed it,more power to you! The risk is smaller,also the woman in question isn't going to get pregnant.And it just feels too damn GOOD!! :D
But seriously, if any of you guys respect your "equipment" and you need some motivation to wear a condom,go to your local library and look at a book on STDs,one with pictures,especially Gonorrhea.
Now imagine thats your "wang" smiling for the camera.Note the fact that it is now every colour of the rainbow & hideously swollen & deformed.
Still want to have sax without a condom?

See, that's one of the reasons I would never have sex with someone without protection. I believe in taking good care of my things, especially those that cannot be replaced. :wink:

[I'm a female, and i think unprotected sex is supposed to scare us more... but i don't see anything wrong with it... i've never had a guy use a condom.

What if not using a condom led to your getting a fatal STD, then you passed that on to another partner and they died? Wouldn't that indicate "something wrong" with unprotected sex?

Please don't think I'm attacking you or being a prude - I just wonder if "risk takers" thought about that issue.

But when u only have it with one guy, and u know that that one guy has only had it with you, and u are careful who u do it with, no just some random guy in a bar, why should it be a problem?

[I'm a female, and i think unprotected sex is supposed to scare us more... but i don't see anything wrong with it... i've never had a guy use a condom.

What if not using a condom led to your getting a fatal STD, then you passed that on to another partner and they died? Wouldn't that indicate "something wrong" with unprotected sex?

Please don't think I'm attacking you or being a prude - I just wonder if "risk takers" thought about that issue.

But when u only have it with one guy, and u know that that one guy has only had it with you, and u are careful who u do it with, no just some random guy in a bar, why should it be a problem?


ah but if you did do it with a random guy in a bar? And also, don't you worry about getting pregnant if you don't want to?

[I'm a female, and i think unprotected sex is supposed to scare us more... but i don't see anything wrong with it... i've never had a guy use a condom.

What if not using a condom led to your getting a fatal STD, then you passed that on to another partner and they died? Wouldn't that indicate "something wrong" with unprotected sex?

Please don't think I'm attacking you or being a prude - I just wonder if "risk takers" thought about that issue.

But when u only have it with one guy, and u know that that one guy has only had it with you, and u are careful who u do it with, no just some random guy in a bar, why should it be a problem?


ah but if you did do it with a random guy in a bar? And also, don't you worry about getting pregnant if you don't want to?

how likeley are ur chances? seriously. My boyfriend and i have been doing it unprotected for some time now, with no problem. i'm not meaning to sound sarcastic if i am... i would seriously like to know... cause we don't use any kind of protection, and we do it... quite a lot, and i've never gotten pregnant.

[I'm a female, and i think unprotected sex is supposed to scare us more... but i don't see anything wrong with it... i've never had a guy use a condom.

What if not using a condom led to your getting a fatal STD, then you passed that on to another partner and they died? Wouldn't that indicate "something wrong" with unprotected sex?

Please don't think I'm attacking you or being a prude - I just wonder if "risk takers" thought about that issue.

But when u only have it with one guy, and u know that that one guy has only had it with you, and u are careful who u do it with, no just some random guy in a bar, why should it be a problem?


ah but if you did do it with a random guy in a bar? And also, don't you worry about getting pregnant if you don't want to?

how likeley are ur chances? seriously. My boyfriend and i have been doing it unprotected for some time now, with no problem. i'm not meaning to sound sarcastic if i am... i would seriously like to know... cause we don't use any kind of protection, and we do it... quite a lot, and i've never gotten pregnant.
You sure you didn't get a disease? Some can make you infertile.
(obviously, there are other reasons people can be infertile, it's just something I'd wonder about in someone who has so much unprotected sex)

Oh, and note, I've been on the Pill since I was like 13- so even when I had unprotected sex I wasn't too worried about getting pregnant- but I know it's not foolproof. Things are going so well in my life right now that I won't even let my boyfriend hug me unless at least one of us is wearing at least some undies

[I'm a female, and i think unprotected sex is supposed to scare us more... but i don't see anything wrong with it... i've never had a guy use a condom.

What if not using a condom led to your getting a fatal STD, then you passed that on to another partner and they died? Wouldn't that indicate "something wrong" with unprotected sex?

Please don't think I'm attacking you or being a prude - I just wonder if "risk takers" thought about that issue.

But when u only have it with one guy, and u know that that one guy has only had it with you, and u are careful who u do it with, no just some random guy in a bar, why should it be a problem?


ah but if you did do it with a random guy in a bar? And also, don't you worry about getting pregnant if you don't want to?

how likeley are ur chances? seriously. My boyfriend and i have been doing it unprotected for some time now, with no problem. i'm not meaning to sound sarcastic if i am... i would seriously like to know... cause we don't use any kind of protection, and we do it... quite a lot, and i've never gotten pregnant.

well that's weird, because if you're having sex a lot and not using any sort of contraceptives, chances are that you would get pregnant. you're simply lucky. or one of you is sterile, because I know from what goes on around me that people who are that careless generally get f***ed (no pun intended).

Fuck no! I always keep a rubber with me just in case.

"Don't be a fool, always wrap your tool."

Sure -- the trick is to use a correct implement. A cigar, for example. :wink:

Not after a friend of mine got herpes. *shudder* I took the liberty of paying her out about it. In fact I'm writing her an email about it now.

Not after a friend of mine got herpes. *shudder* I took the liberty of paying her out about it. In fact I'm writing her an email about it now.
Great! I betcha will soon see her in one of them, "happy people with herpes" commercials, frolicking in the woods like the [insert yo' national animal here]. :D

[I'm a female, and i think unprotected sex is supposed to scare us more... but i don't see anything wrong with it... i've never had a guy use a condom.

What if not using a condom led to your getting a fatal STD, then you passed that on to another partner and they died? Wouldn't that indicate "something wrong" with unprotected sex?

Please don't think I'm attacking you or being a prude - I just wonder if "risk takers" thought about that issue.

But when u only have it with one guy, and u know that that one guy has only had it with you, and u are careful who u do it with, no just some random guy in a bar, why should it be a problem?


ah but if you did do it with a random guy in a bar? And also, don't you worry about getting pregnant if you don't want to?

how likeley are ur chances? seriously. My boyfriend and i have been doing it unprotected for some time now, with no problem. i'm not meaning to sound sarcastic if i am... i would seriously like to know... cause we don't use any kind of protection, and we do it... quite a lot, and i've never gotten pregnant.

well that's weird, because if you're having sex a lot and not using any sort of contraceptives, chances are that you would get pregnant. you're simply lucky. or one of you is sterile, because I know from what goes on around me that people who are that careless generally get f***ed (no pun intended).

How would someone find out if they're sterile or not?

I wouldn't have unprotected sex with someone I didn't know. I am against one night stands.

However, I would with a girlfriend of 3 months+
What exactly are you going to learn in three months? are you going to send them to an STD clinic for testing?- Give them a Polygraph test? That does tend to put the dampeners on a relationship! and don't give me that "I know her. Shes not that kind of girl" crap.
I've met plenty of girls who I have thought that about,but those same girls have had their knickers off before we've even had the customary "cup of coffee" (The quiet ones are the worst! -Or the best,depending on how you look at it!)
-Some of you guys & gals really need to LOOK at a book on STDs-don't just go "Yeah,I know" -pick up a book- NOW F**KING READ IT!!!!! LOOK AT THE PICTURES TOO!!! SOME OF YOU NEED VISUAL AIDS!!!
Some diseases can remain dormant for years with no symptoms whatsoever before causing serious problems (E.G. -Sterility)
I have succumbed to lust a couple of times (just oral,see previous thread) So I'm not being hypocritical-I'm just saying-Be aware of the risks

Sure -- the trick is to use a correct implement. A cigar, for example. :wink:

*smack*
ohmyGOD thats nasty
dont you know that ANY form of tobacco use is bad for your health?

In principal no, but after it happening once when I was extremely drunk (I did tell him not to before I got drunk) I can't guarantee anything. I'll make an attempt not to drink so much near a man who is likely to take advantage again though, the trips to the doctor afterwards just weren't worth it.

I'd have to say maybe - providing that what I "barely know" about them is a medical report indicating they're clean. :wink:

What exactly are you going to learn in three months? are you going to send them to an STD clinic for testing?- Give them a Polygraph test? That does tend to put the dampeners on a relationship! and don't give me that "I know her. Shes not that kind of girl" crap.
I've met plenty of girls who I have thought that about,but those same girls have had their knickers off before we've even had the customary "cup of coffee" (The quiet ones are the worst! -Or the best,depending on how you look at it!)
-Some of you guys & gals really need to LOOK at a book on STDs-don't just go "Yeah,I know" -pick up a book- NOW F**KING READ IT!!!!! LOOK AT THE PICTURES TOO!!! SOME OF YOU NEED VISUAL AIDS!!!
Some diseases can remain dormant for years with no symptoms whatsoever before causing serious problems (E.G. -Sterility)
I have succumbed to lust a couple of times (just oral,see previous thread) So I'm not being hypocritical-I'm just saying-Be aware of the risks

That would be "visual aides". Visual AIDS would be an odd disease...

Would You Have UNPROTECTED Sex With Someone You Barely Know?



Depends, What do ya look like?

What exactly are you going to learn in three months? are you going to send them to an STD clinic for testing?- Give them a Polygraph test? That does tend to put the dampeners on a relationship! and don't give me that "I know her. Shes not that kind of girl" crap.
I've met plenty of girls who I have thought that about,but those same girls have had their knickers off before we've even had the customary "cup of coffee" (The quiet ones are the worst! -Or the best,depending on how you look at it!)
-Some of you guys & gals really need to LOOK at a book on STDs-don't just go "Yeah,I know" -pick up a book- NOW F**KING READ IT!!!!! LOOK AT THE PICTURES TOO!!! SOME OF YOU NEED VISUAL AIDS!!!
Some diseases can remain dormant for years with no symptoms whatsoever before causing serious problems (E.G. -Sterility)
I have succumbed to lust a couple of times (just oral,see previous thread) So I'm not being hypocritical-I'm just saying-Be aware of the risks

That would be "visual aides". Visual AIDS would be an odd disease...
Not that odd......I know a guy with Hearing AIDS-He's got AIDS in both ears!!! Seriously though,look at any topic,the average standard of spelling is terrible anyway

Would I have unprotected sex with someone I barely know...

If I ever get an opportunity, i'll let you know.

((bump))

No sex outside of marriage and never use protection because 1) You're married and 2) Birth control is wrong. If you don't want kids it is called Coitus Interruptus (withdrawl before ejaculation)

I think people who are promiscuous and get STDs, they are just receiving their just rewards from God. God will stirke down all those who anger Him.

No sex outside of marriage and never use protection because 1) You're married and 2) Birth control is wrong. If you don't want kids it is called Coitus Interruptus (withdrawl before ejaculation)

ya but fluff, since we do not have control over our spouses nor can we watch them 24/7 to make sure they dont misbehave, never using protection can end us up DEAD. not that its something i worry about personally, it IS a factor in modern life

I think people who are promiscuous and get STDs, they are just receiving their just rewards from God. God will stirke down all those who anger Him.

God isn't real. It's just a made-up entity to brainwash people into doing what they thought was right.

No sex outside of marriage and never use protection because 1) You're married and 2) Birth control is wrong. If you don't want kids it is called Coitus Interruptus (withdrawl before ejaculation)

ya but fluff, since we do not have control over our spouses nor can we watch them 24/7 to make sure they dont misbehave, never using protection can end us up DEAD. not that its something i worry about personally, it IS a factor in modern life


Just make sure you marry somebody who will be in the 30-40% of those who don't commit adultery.

I think people who are promiscuous and get STDs, they are just receiving their just rewards from God. God will stirke down all those who anger Him.

God isn't real. It's just a made-up entity to brainwash people into doing what they thought was right.


Whatever. Well people clearly need something to make them act right. Nobody acts right anymore.

I think people who are promiscuous and get STDs, they are just receiving their just rewards from God. God will stirke down all those who anger Him.

God isn't real. It's just a made-up entity to brainwash people into doing what they thought was right.


Whatever.

Well, if you think about it, why are you and your God in charge of what other people want to do? I mean, you might not agree with having unprotected sex with a stranger, and neither do I, because I wouldn't personally do it.

But if there is someone that's gonna do it, then let them do what they want, don't hit them over the head with a book of laws that you want to follow.

I think people who are promiscuous and get STDs, they are just receiving their just rewards from God. God will stirke down all those who anger Him.

God isn't real. It's just a made-up entity to brainwash people into doing what they thought was right.


Whatever.

Well, if you think about it, why are you and your God in charge of what other people want to do? I mean, you might not agree with having unprotected sex with a stranger, and neither do I, because I wouldn't personally do it.

But if there is someone that's gonna do it, then let them do what they want, don't hit them over the head with a book of laws that you want to follow.


Nope, because we cannot allow sinners to drag the righteous down with them.

I think people who are promiscuous and get STDs, they are just receiving their just rewards from God. God will stirke down all those who anger Him.

God isn't real. It's just a made-up entity to brainwash people into doing what they thought was right.


Whatever.

Well, if you think about it, why are you and your God in charge of what other people want to do? I mean, you might not agree with having unprotected sex with a stranger, and neither do I, because I wouldn't personally do it.

But if there is someone that's gonna do it, then let them do what they want, don't hit them over the head with a book of laws that you want to follow.


Nope, because we cannot allow sinners to drag the righteous down with them.

Well, firstly, if one "sinner" as you call them wants to have unprotected sex with another stranger, what's to say that person is righteous, and not another sinner?

You're still saying that someone who doesn't believe in exactly what you believe is wrong, and will be sentenced to eternal torture and damnation. That makes you a biggot, by definition.

biggot




Call me what you want, just try to spell it right next time.

Well as of now I am 14 so unless I went somewhere like Portu Rico I could never actualy do it legaly and besides I have no one I love enough (or at all for that matter, except family and well...eww...) to actualy do it with. Well if he/her had told me earnestly they had never before had a sexual partner (and bearing in mind if I am going to have sex with them they are going to be someone trustworthy) and they were going to take a morning after pill or were on contraceptive pills (in the case of women...mostly) then perhaps yes but probably I would still wait until a test detailing that they were STD free had been accuried and inspected by myself. But to be honest just buying some rubber is a lot simpler if alittle more expensive. Unless of course I could find one of those luurvly liberal healthcare websites to send me some free ones that is. Play safe.

Well, firstly, if one "sinner" as you call them wants to have unprotected sex with another stranger, what's to say that person is righteous, and not another sinner?




Well what if the sinner is an adulteror who has a righteous spouse that ends up getting STDs because of the spouses infidelity?

Just make sure you marry somebody who will be in the 30-40% of those who don't commit adultery.

easier said than done
many a person has found out that his/her spouse is cheating only by the diagnosis of an STD in the doctors office.
so god will punish ME because my husband is promiscuous behind my back? thats love alright!

biggot




Call me what you want, just try to spell it right next time.

Your inability to combat my statement with anything other than a childish attack at a typo allows me to conclude that you are in fact, an idiot. And, ironically, a hypocrite, because you know, we're all humans, and how about that, "He who is without sin may cast the first stone"...? Remember that?

biggot




Call me what you want, just try to spell it right next time.

Your inability to combat my statement with anything other than a childish attack at a typo allows me to conclude that you are in fact, an idiot. And, ironically, a hypocrite, because you know, we're all humans, and how about that, "He who is without sin may cast the first stone"...? Remember that?

Well I think in regards to adultery and sexual matters, I'm without sin, so can I cast the first stone?

Well, firstly, if one "sinner" as you call them wants to have unprotected sex with another stranger, what's to say that person is righteous, and not another sinner?




Well what if the sinner is an adulteror who has a righteous spouse that ends up getting STDs because of the spouses infidelity?
Just make sure you marry somebody who will be in the 30-40% of those who don't commit adultery.

Quite frankly, I hope I die young (say 25-27...30 tops...) I don't want to get old, and have to worry about health, retirement, government, reponsibilities, the world, job security...and so on. What's important is in the here and now, and If I get too old...that would just suck...SO, therefore I would have sex with someone I barely knew...hell, it's fun...and I ain't gonna live to be 100 anyway, wo what the hell...

Your inability to combat my statement with anything other than a childish attack at a typo allows me to conclude that you are in fact, an idiot.

I'm just telling you if you cannot do anything other than sling names (bigot being the one you chose) then at least spell it right. If you wish to have a real debate I suggest you sling data, facts, figures, and well written opinions, rather than insults. But I don't think you are capable of such.

Quite frankly, I hope I die young (say 25-27...30 tops...) I don't want to get old, and have to worry about health, retirement, government, reponsibilities, the world, job security...and so on. What's important is in the here and now, and If I get too old...that would just suck...SO, therefore I would have sex with someone I barely knew...hell, it's fun...and I ain't gonna live to be 100 anyway, wo what the hell...


If you think 30 is old you have issues. I know people who are 50-60 who are as fit as a 20-30 year old. It's all about how well you take care of yourself.

biggot




Call me what you want, just try to spell it right next time.

Your inability to combat my statement with anything other than a childish attack at a typo allows me to conclude that you are in fact, an idiot. And, ironically, a hypocrite, because you know, we're all humans, and how about that, "He who is without sin may cast the first stone"...? Remember that?
Well I think in regards to adultery and sexual matters, I'm without sin, so can I cast the first stone?
No, the question is if you are without sin with regards to spelling
Besides, I don't think that's what Jesus meant...since he wouldn't let anyone cast stones...you know, since they had all sinned in some way
edit: oops, tried to attribute my point to the person I'm disagreeing with

Birth control is wrong. If you don't want kids it is called Coitus Interruptus (withdrawl before ejaculation)

Withdrawal doesn't prevent pregnancy - sperm can get into the woman minutes before the man has his main ejaculation. Did you honestly not know that?

Quite frankly, I hope I die young (say 25-27...30 tops...) I don't want to get old, and have to worry about health, retirement, government, reponsibilities, the world, job security...and so on. What's important is in the here and now, and If I get too old...that would just suck...SO, therefore I would have sex with someone I barely knew...hell, it's fun...and I ain't gonna live to be 100 anyway, wo what the hell...


If you think 30 is old you have issues. I know people who are 50-60 who are as fit as a 20-30 year old. It's all about how well you take care of yourself.


No, I don't think 30 is old at all, I just don't want to live much past it...It also doesn't matter who's fit or not...It's just a matter of a cruel world, and a rock star attitude.

I actually had a near death experience, and I thought It would have made me want to change my opinion on dying young...but it didn't, so...

Birth control is wrong. If you don't want kids it is called Coitus Interruptus (withdrawl before ejaculation)

Withdrawal doesn't prevent pregnancy - sperm can get into the woman minutes before the man has his main ejaculation. Did you honestly not know that?

It greatly reduces the chances.

I'm with Fluff on this one...it does reduce the chances...and something is better than nothing...

I'm with Fluff on this one...it does reduce the chances...and something is better than nothing... But fluff was only promoting pulling out because she was against using protection
All a condom does is reduce the chances even more. Why would one be bad and one be good?
Besides, I thought that the bible said that to spill your sperm....or...whatever was a sin. And that's why masturbation was bad. And god smote the poor guy cause he wouldn't get it on with his recently deceased brother's widow

Yeah...but I don't believe that stuff in the bible...

I'm with Fluff on this one...it does reduce the chances...and something is better than nothing... But fluff was only promoting pulling out because she was against using protection
All a condom does is reduce the chances even more. Why would one be bad and one be good?
Besides, I thought that the bible said that to spill your sperm....or...whatever was a sin. And that's why masturbation was bad. And god smote the poor guy cause he wouldn't get it on with his recently deceased brother's widow

FluffyCat is a he :)

FluffyCat is a he :)
whatever...I'd think you'd kinda get used to it with your name...

FluffyCat is a he :)
whatever...I'd think you'd kinda get used to it with your name...


My cats are Fluffy, Snowy, Toby, and Beauty, (there was a Brandy but she died a few years back). I named Fluffy, Snowy, and Toby.

FluffyCat is a he :)
whatever...I'd think you'd kinda get used to it with your name...


My cats are Fluffy, Snowy, Toby, and Beauty, (there was a Brandy but she died a few years back). I named Fluffy, Snowy, and Toby.
well so are you a guy or is the cat a guy?
My cats are Roxy and Voodoo (and the late Kitty Cat and Mushroom)
Out of them, I only know of voodoo having unprotected sex...she had 2 litters before we had her fixed

FluffyCat is a he :)
whatever...I'd think you'd kinda get used to it with your name...


My cats are Fluffy, Snowy, Toby, and Beauty, (there was a Brandy but she died a few years back). I named Fluffy, Snowy, and Toby.
well so are you a guy or is the cat a guy?
My cats are Roxy and Voodoo (and the late Kitty Cat and Mushroom)
Out of them, I only know of voodoo having unprotected sex...she had 2 litters before we had her fixed


I am male. 2 of my cats are male, 2 are female. (Fluffy and Snowy are males).

2) Birth control is wrong.

how do you figure?

If you don't want kids it is called Coitus Interruptus (withdrawl before ejaculation)

want to know the odds of getting pregnant with unprotected sex? something like 30%.
want to know the odds of getting pregnant using the withdrawl method and nothing else?
30% on the nose.

coitus interruptus does shit all due to precum and poor timing.

also, there are reasons to use birth conttol while married... i.e. not wanting kids.

Well people clearly need something to make them act right. Nobody acts right anymore.

the thought of god obviously doesn't make people "act right" look at those priests who molest children, for crying out loud.
only people can make themselves "act right" no god has the power to do what willpower, niceness and common sense can have us do.

most people only have a few (2 or 3) partners before they get married.
Is that your opinion or do you have some sort of study to back that number up? I'm not attacking you--I'm really curious about this, because my suspicion, and it's only a suspicion, is that the number is higher among younger people, although it may be lower than it was, say, in the 70s.

the average number of sexual parteners for a person in their lifetime is 3. well, it was 10 years ago when i was in grade 7 and we had "cup sex" for health class.

3 people............ :lol: :lol: :lol:

Sorry, but i know people who go through 3 people a month, so i cant see this figure as being realistic.


there are also a lot of people who have sex with one, two or zero people. i don't know many people who have had sexual partners that number in the double digits. i know plenty of virgins or people who've had sex with one other person...

does shit all due to precum and poor timing.


.


What a crude choice of words. I guess that means you realized you lost and had to resort to using such crude words. "Cum" is one of the most disgusting words in existence.

actually, that's a term that's commonly used for preejaculate. it's just a hell of a lot shorter.
how did i lose? i just started with you.
you didn't explain why birth control is so evil, nor did you deal with the statistics i presented demonstrating that if you're going to use the withdrawl method, then you've done nothing to reduce the risk of pregnancy and you just end up makign a horrible mess.

i think that you simply used that post of "disgust" to feign victory so you wouldn't have to admit that you're wrong.

actually, that's a term that's commonly used for preejaculate. it's just a hell of a lot shorter.
how did i lose? i just started with you.
you didn't explain why birth control is so evil, nor did you deal with the statistics i presented demonstrating that if you're going to use the withdrawl method, then you've done nothing to reduce the risk of pregnancy and you just end up makign a horrible mess.

i think that you simply used that post of "disgust" to feign victory so you wouldn't have to admit that you're wrong.

no answer?

i expected as much.

in response to the original question... i would not, under any circumstances under my power, have unprotected sex with a near stranger.
however rape happens, and i pray that i'm never a victim...

and i hope i stay sane, and i don't ever do anything stupid in that category that i'd regret...

actually, that's a term that's commonly used for preejaculate. it's just a hell of a lot shorter.
how did i lose? i just started with you.
you didn't explain why birth control is so evil, nor did you deal with the statistics i presented demonstrating that if you're going to use the withdrawl method, then you've done nothing to reduce the risk of pregnancy and you just end up makign a horrible mess.

i think that you simply used that post of "disgust" to feign victory so you wouldn't have to admit that you're wrong.


Withdrawl greatly reduces the risk of pregnancy. You cannot simply say it does nothing. Obviously less sperm = less chance of pregnancy.

you would think so, but the odds are approximately the same for using withdrawl as for just plugging away. it only takes one sperm.

also, if does do something: leave a huge mess on the sheets.

actually, that's a term that's commonly used for preejaculate. it's just a hell of a lot shorter.
how did i lose? i just started with you.
you didn't explain why birth control is so evil, nor did you deal with the statistics i presented demonstrating that if you're going to use the withdrawl method, then you've done nothing to reduce the risk of pregnancy and you just end up makign a horrible mess.

i think that you simply used that post of "disgust" to feign victory so you wouldn't have to admit that you're wrong.


Withdrawl greatly reduces the risk of pregnancy. You cannot simply say it does nothing. Obviously less sperm = less chance of pregnancy.
Well you still haven't given any reasons as to why other forms of birth control are bad...You know, the ones that work...?

for some testamonials about the "effectiveness" of the withdrawl method, ask these ladies...
http://www.pregnancylounge.com/ftopic7504.html

Withdrawl greatly reduces the risk of pregnancy. You cannot simply say it does nothing. Obviously less sperm = less chance of pregnancy.
Well you still haven't given any reasons as to why other forms of birth control are bad...You know, the ones that work...?[/quote]



Because sex is for procreation.

Because sex is for procreation.

not always it isn't.

who says that's all it's for?

for some testamonials about the "effectiveness" of the withdrawl method, ask these ladies...
http://www.pregnancylounge.com/ftopic7504.html

Somebody said

"Me and my husband"


My husband and I is the correct way, it's no wonder withdrawl didn't work, they're probably too stupid to realize you have to take it out before ejaculation, not after. :)

Because sex is for procreation.

not always it isn't.

who says that's all it's for?


GOD

My husband and I is the correct way, it's no wonder withdrawl didn't work, they're probably too stupid to realize you have to take it out before ejaculation, not after. :)

they still didn't want a kid, and it's still proof that withdrawl doesn't work.

http://kidshealth.org/teen/sexual_health/contraception/contraception_withdrawal.html

How Well Does It Work?
Over the course of one year, about 27 out of 100 typical couples who rely on withdrawal to prevent pregnancy will have an accidental pregnancy.

that's 27% of the time. the percentage for not using anything is 30%. withdrawl doesn't work.

Even for people who think they are doing it correctly, withdrawal is not an effective way to prevent pregnancy. Guys leak a bit of sperm out of the penis even before ejaculation, which means that even if they pull out before they ejaculate, a girl can still become pregnant. If a guy ejaculates close enough to the outside of the vagina, the sperm can swim up into the vagina.

Because sex is for procreation.

not always it isn't.

who says that's all it's for?


GOD

my god doesn't. my god thinks sex is fine and dandy, like sour candy.

curious, is foreplay also wrong by your god?

Because sex is for procreation.

not always it isn't.

who says that's all it's for?


GOD

my god doesn't. my god thinks sex is fine and dandy, like sour candy.

curious, is foreplay also wrong by your god?

Sex is about reproduction, and it's only supposed to be intercourse with the man on top. Anything else will most certainly anger God.

Sex is about reproduction, and it's only supposed to be intercourse with the man on top. Anything else will most certainly anger God.

again, as i said, my god is fine with it.

also, where does your god say this, exactly?

(btw, in 10 mins, i must sleep, have to work tomorrow, make it snappy)

Sex is about reproduction, and it's only supposed to be intercourse with the man on top. Anything else will most certainly anger God.

again, as i said, my god is fine with it.

also, where does your god say this, exactly?

(btw, in 10 mins, i must sleep, have to work tomorrow, make it snappy)


Read Leviticus, (The 3rd book of the bibil, It is in the Old Testament)

Read all of Leviticus, it's all very good.

Because sex is for procreation.

not always it isn't.

who says that's all it's for?


GOD

my god doesn't. my god thinks sex is fine and dandy, like sour candy.

curious, is foreplay also wrong by your god?

Sex is about reproduction, and it's only supposed to be intercourse with the man on top. Anything else will most certainly anger God.

you seem to favor the old testament God over the new testament God... and have you ever read song of solomon? man oh man.. that book is out there.

you seem to favor the old testament God over the new testament God... and have you ever read song of solomon? man oh man.. that book is out there.


It's part of the bible so yes I've read it.

Sex is about reproduction, and it's only supposed to be intercourse with the man on top. Anything else will most certainly anger God.

again, as i said, my god is fine with it.

also, where does your god say this, exactly?

(btw, in 10 mins, i must sleep, have to work tomorrow, make it snappy)


Read Leviticus, (The 3rd book of the bibil, It is in the Old Testament)

Read all of Leviticus, it's all very good.

not really...

and oh man, i missed the bit about the man beign on top. what the hell is up with that?!

i woudl like some specific quotes here.

and yeah, as pointed out, that soloman guy was a kinky bastard.

you seem to favor the old testament God over the new testament God... and have you ever read song of solomon? man oh man.. that book is out there.


It's part of the bible so yes I've read it.

and ignored it completely it seems.

isn't it wonderful how you pick and choose what to believe? oh, good stuff, isn't it.

you: you're wrong because you had sex cowgirl style.
me: well, you're wrong for wearing a cotton-poly blend! (if you want to go by leviticus that is)

you seem to favor the old testament God over the new testament God... and have you ever read song of solomon? man oh man.. that book is out there.


It's part of the bible so yes I've read it.

and ignored it completely it seems.

isn't it wonderful how you pick and choose what to believe? oh, good stuff, isn't it.

you: you're wrong because you had sex cowgirl style.
me: well, you're wrong for wearing a cotton-poly blend! (if you want to go by leviticus that is)


Yes I know you aren't supposed to wear clothing of two fabrics. Don't preach to me, I know my bible.

And the song of solomon is something I ignore because it teaches no lessons, it is about lust. Nothing more.

Sex is about reproduction, and it's only supposed to be intercourse with the man on top. Anything else will most certainly anger God.

again, as i said, my god is fine with it.

also, where does your god say this, exactly?

(btw, in 10 mins, i must sleep, have to work tomorrow, make it snappy)
my god likes sex too!

a great thing about worshipping myself... :D

Yes I know you aren't supposed to wear clothing of two fabrics. Don't preach to me, I know my bible.

And the song of solomon is something I ignore because it teaches no lessons, it is about lust. Nothing more.
then why are you wearing cloth of mixed fibres? why did you eat that porkchop? or those shrimp? or that lobster?

and the song of soloman is still part of the bible. as i said, you can't just pick and choose what you like and don't like about the thing. either you accept it all or you're not following your doctrine and that makes you a non-christian. just as lowly as the rest of us.

obviously if you believe that god wrote/inspired the bible, and that the bible is accurate, then you would have to concede that the songs of soloman were intended by god to be read and acknowledged, rather than swept under a rug and ignored. thus either you concede that god doesn't mind sex for pleasure, or you say that the bible has a fatal flaw. in which case, who knows what else could be wrong with it... oh me oh my, what a can of worms you have opened.

Sex is just too tempting to think about protection. It crosses my mind.

Yes I know you aren't supposed to wear clothing of two fabrics. Don't preach to me, I know my bible.

And the song of solomon is something I ignore because it teaches no lessons, it is about lust. Nothing more.
then why are you wearing cloth of mixed fibres? why did you eat that porkchop? or those shrimp? or that lobster?

and the song of soloman is still part of the bible. as i said, you can't just pick and choose what you like and don't like about the thing. either you accept it all or you're not following your doctrine and that makes you a non-christian. just as lowly as the rest of us.

obviously if you believe that god wrote/inspired the bible, and that the bible is accurate, then you would have to concede that the songs of soloman were intended by god to be read and acknowledged, rather than swept under a rug and ignored. thus either you concede that god doesn't mind sex for pleasure, or you say that the bible has a fatal flaw. in which case, who knows what else could be wrong with it... oh me oh my, what a can of worms you have opened.

The clothing I am wearing is 100% cotton.

most definatly not. unless they wanted to go get tested beforehand.
which i highly doubt will happen.
so basically
no.

If you don't know somebody well enough to the point where you worry about STDs, then stop and ask yourself, "Why would I have sex with them."

Yes I know you aren't supposed to wear clothing of two fabrics. Don't preach to me, I know my bible.

And the song of solomon is something I ignore because it teaches no lessons, it is about lust. Nothing more.
then why are you wearing cloth of mixed fibres? why did you eat that porkchop? or those shrimp? or that lobster?

and the song of soloman is still part of the bible. as i said, you can't just pick and choose what you like and don't like about the thing. either you accept it all or you're not following your doctrine and that makes you a non-christian. just as lowly as the rest of us.

obviously if you believe that god wrote/inspired the bible, and that the bible is accurate, then you would have to concede that the songs of soloman were intended by god to be read and acknowledged, rather than swept under a rug and ignored. thus either you concede that god doesn't mind sex for pleasure, or you say that the bible has a fatal flaw. in which case, who knows what else could be wrong with it... oh me oh my, what a can of worms you have opened.

The clothing I am wearing is 100% cotton.

yes, because that was the only thing i said... that's it.
but since you started this up (assuming here that you have no response to everything else, perhaps you ignored it the way you ignored the songs of soloman) were all the clothes you wore yesterday cotton? what about the suit you wear to church? am i going to have to make you go through your whole wardrobe now?
not to mention how you didn't address the food issue. and are you cut?

Yes I know you aren't supposed to wear clothing of two fabrics. Don't preach to me, I know my bible.

And the song of solomon is something I ignore because it teaches no lessons, it is about lust. Nothing more.
then why are you wearing cloth of mixed fibres? why did you eat that porkchop? or those shrimp? or that lobster?

and the song of soloman is still part of the bible. as i said, you can't just pick and choose what you like and don't like about the thing. either you accept it all or you're not following your doctrine and that makes you a non-christian. just as lowly as the rest of us.

obviously if you believe that god wrote/inspired the bible, and that the bible is accurate, then you would have to concede that the songs of soloman were intended by god to be read and acknowledged, rather than swept under a rug and ignored. thus either you concede that god doesn't mind sex for pleasure, or you say that the bible has a fatal flaw. in which case, who knows what else could be wrong with it... oh me oh my, what a can of worms you have opened.

The clothing I am wearing is 100% cotton.

That is your only response?

Sex is just too tempting to think about protection. It crosses my mind.

see... my idea on the matter is that if you're not mature enough to make the fore-desicions and treat something like sex with more caution, like with making sure you have protection, making sure both of you don't have STDs of any sorts... then you just aren't mature enough to be having sex in the first place.

yeah.

All the clothing I wear is 100% one material only.


I stopped going to church as it became a tool of the false prophet. As the bible warns us many would be deceived and obey lying demons. All the sermons I hear now are over the radio from real preachers who aren't afraid to preach the word.


1 Timothy 4:1 The Spirit says clearly that some people will abandon the faith in later times: they will obey lying spirits and follow the teachings of demons. Such teachings are spread by deceitful liars, whose consciences are dead, as if burnt with a hot iron.




My eating habits are fine, and as to the last question, I never discuss anything in that regards with anybody (not even family), so I certainly won't discuss it online with strangers, personal issues are personal.

well, if you're following leviticus, you'll be cut.

and you still ignored the rest of my initial post.

and i have to go to bed.
no worries though, if i come back tomorrow and you still haven't said anything in response, i'll simply assume that you got pwned.

well, if you're following leviticus, you'll be cut.

and you still ignored the rest of my initial post.

and i have to go to bed.
no worries though, if i come back tomorrow and you still haven't said anything in response, i'll simply assume that you got pwned.

I honestly don't know what to make of the Song of Solomon, okay happy?

I just ignore it because it is one part of the bible and it contradicts almost every other part of the bible.

I honestly don't know what to make of the Song of Solomon, okay happy?

I just ignore it because it is one part of the bible and it contradicts almost every other part of the bible.

so rather than actually think about the issue, you ignore it and never stop to consider that perhaps the bible isn't all about abstinance and self-deprivation (as paul would have you think) does it rock your world to consider that perhaps the church was wrong (though you claim not to go, you still seem to enjoy interpreting scripture in the same way many of them do)

the point is, if you consider that one part of the bible wrong, then what's to stop the rest of it from being wrong as well? it doesn't make much sense for it to be an infallible book if a whole book in it is wrong and shouldn't be there, now does it?

I honestly don't know what to make of the Song of Solomon, okay happy?

I just ignore it because it is one part of the bible and it contradicts almost every other part of the bible.yes, but it is in there, right? and according to you, the bible is God's holy word.
so it has to be divine. and ignoring God's word... oh man, according to you, God will probably smite you now for disregarding text.

*starts rummaging for a verse to back her*

I honestly don't know what to make of the Song of Solomon, okay happy?

I just ignore it because it is one part of the bible and it contradicts almost every other part of the bible.

so rather than actually think about the issue, you ignore it and never stop to consider that perhaps the bible isn't all about abstinance and self-deprivation (as paul would have you think) does it rock your world to consider that perhaps the church was wrong (though you claim not to go, you still seem to enjoy interpreting scripture in the same way many of them do)

the point is, if you consider that one part of the bible wrong, then what's to stop the rest of it from being wrong as well? it doesn't make much sense for it to be an infallible book if a whole book in it is wrong and shouldn't be there, now does it?

I'll talk to my preacher about it. And no, I made up my mind that the song of solomon was not for me. I didn't just wake up and decide to not think about things.

I'll talk to my preacher about it. And no, I made up my mind that the song of solomon was not for me. I didn't just wake up and decide to not think about things.

i thought you didn't go to church.

and how cna you simply deceide one part of the bible is not for you and still claim to follow it? that simply doesn't make sense. that's like "i'm going to follow the bible, but i'm not going to love my neighbours, becuase i've deceided that what jesus taught just wasn't for me."

now, i really have to sleep.

ever think that song of solomon was about married people? somehow seems to justify the whole thing, doesn't it? and talking about how one feels about one's beloved, even if the book were written about a relationship outside marriage, is natural. what the guy feels versus what he does are entirely different animals. nothing about song of solomon contradicts the rest of the bible. God isn't about depriving everybody of everything. seriously. get to know Him. you'll learn. He's just way more aware of the way the world works (seeing as things like the laws of physics and what have you, He authored), and knows how we were built to function. because of this, He knows exactly what kind of relationships are going to be the most meaningful and the most fulfilling. He doesn't make a bunch of nonsense rules just for the sake of ruining fun. you ever really want to sign up for an adventure, relinquish control of your life. admit that if you're all there is, your life really isn't worth living at all. try living the way you were created to. follow some laws. it's harder, granted, but how many of you can say you're up for the challenge? if nothing else, what do you have to lose trying? i'm sure there are some of you that feel you have the whole freaking world going for you, and you may be right, but for those of you strong enough to admit that your life doesn't seem to be going as well as it's meant to be, just give it a shot. i know this resonates with some of you. the rest of you are going to write me off entirely. more power to you. but keep this at the back of your minds: if life sucks, go back to the Author of Life, and let Him take control of the pen writing your story.