Follow Dan

Facebook    Twitter    Instagram    YouTube
Savage Lovecast
Dan Savage's Hump
It Gets Better Project

Savage Love Podcast

Got a question for Dan Savage?
Call the Savage Love Podcast at 206-201-2720
or email Dan at mail@savagelove.net.

Savage Love Archives

More in the Archives »

More from Dan Savage

More in the Archives »

Books by Dan Savage

Want a Second Opinion?

Contact Dan Savage

Savage on YouTube

Loading...

Small Government

April 27, 2011

  • comments
  • Print

I'm a young heteroflexible guy who has been a "sugar baby" for a handful of wealthy older guys. I love it! I get money, I have fun being with them, and the guys seem to like having me around. The problem is that I just got with a new guy who is really great except for one thing: He is HIV positive. I like the fact that he told me, and I am open to being with him sexually even though I am HIV negative and want to stay that way.

He is VERY submissive—he wants to be used and abused sexually, physically, and mentally. My question is, what kinds of sex acts are okay to do with this guy? I read on one site that him rimming me is fine, and on another that him giving me a blowjob with a condom is safe, too. But I can't find a site that specifically explains which sex acts are safe and which ones aren't when one person is positive and one person is negative.

Help In Virginia

It's pretty simple, HIV: Sex acts that expose you to his semen and/or blood are definitely unsafe, and sex acts that expose him to your semen and/or blood are mostly safe. Rimming you, blowing you (even without a condom), getting fucked by you (with a condom)—all very low risk for HIV transmission. If he's on a drug regimen and his viral load is undetectable, HIV, your already-low risks of being exposed while, say, accepting a blowjob (and a check) are even lower. The risks aren't nonexistent—all sex acts carry some degree of risk—but if the risks were any closer to nonexistent, they'd be sitting on nonexistent's lap.

And bear this in mind: Odds are good that some of the other guys you've babied for—some of your previous daddies—were HIV positive and either didn't know or didn't have the decency to disclose. This guy's willingness to disclose is evidence not just of his honesty and decency, HIV, but of his respect for you and his commitment to keeping you safe. This guy is less likely to ask you to engage in sex acts that are higher risk or unsafe than a guy who isn't aware that he's positive or is actively hiding the fact that he's positive. And his interest in being "used and abused" creates lots of hot safe-sex-play options—letting him beat off while he licks your boots or jerking him off while he's tied to the bed with your jock in his mouth are no-risk sexual activities that he's likely to enjoy immensely.


I'm a 24-year-old straight guy. I've been with my girl for three years, and things are great—great sex life, great communication, etc. We have lots of sex—but for the last year or so, she has not been on birth control and we have not been using condoms. We're not against the idea of a child, but we aren't currently going for it. I was always told that pulling out was a 100 percent ineffective method of birth control. So my question is, I guess, could there be something wrong with one of us? How could we have unprotected sex for a year without getting her pregnant? We both really want children eventually and are worried it might not happen.

Sent From My iPhone

Withdrawal is a much more effective birth control method than most sex advisers are comfortable acknowledging. But facts are facts: A comprehensive study conducted by researchers at the Guttmacher Institute found that withdrawal was almost as effective a birth control option as condoms. ("Better Than Nothing or Savvy Risk-Reduction Practice? The Importance of Withdrawal," Contraception, June 2009.)

"If the male partner withdraws before ejaculation every time a couple has vaginal intercourse, about 4% of couples will become pregnant over the course of a year," the authors of the study wrote. That compares pretty favorably with the 2 percent of straight couples who will become pregnant using condoms perfectly over the course of a year.

In the real world, of course, very few people do anything perfectly. When you take mistakes, leaks, and broken condoms into account, researchers estimate that 17 percent of straight couples who rely on condoms will become pregnant in any given year. Not all withdrawers use withdrawal perfectly, either—amazingly enough, some guys get distracted and forget to pull out as their orgasms approach—but the research shows that just 18 percent of straight couples who use withdrawal will get pregnant in any given year.

So odds are good that you're not infertile, SFMi, just lucky.


I'm a young lesbian. I recently met a girl who's cute, and I think we're on the likely-to-have-sex-soon track. The thing is, she confided in me that she's participated in needle play in dungeon-party situations. I'm not someone who is turned off by kinkiness just 'cause it's kinky, but it seems like even "safe" needle play is a recipe for STI transmission unless you're playing with trained medical professionals. She says she gets tested regularly, but still, would it be really risky for me to sleep with her?

Enthusiastic Reader

Every time I've watched needle play in a dungeon-party situation—watched with my hands clamped over my eyes, peeking through the small spaces between my fingers—no one was being stuck with rusty needles by dirty-handed brutes. All the public needle-play scenes I've witnessed were ostentatiously sterile affairs: These kinksters, some of whom were trained medical professionals, made a big show of using alcohol wipes, cotton swabs, latex gloves, and clean sharps. I think it's fair to ask this girl for more information about her blood and needle experiences, about the safety precautions that her partners took, and about how recently she was tested. But rest assured, ER, that the most effective STI transmission routes involve sticking dicks in people in completely vanilla situations, not clean needles in dungeon-party situations.


Here's some information for MILK, the man who is aroused by the thought of being sprayed with his wife's breast milk: It is common for newly lactating women to experience strong "milk ejection reflexes" during sex. This is induced by the hormone oxytocin, which is released during labor and orgasm, and when the milk "lets down" during breast-feeding. In other words: New mothers often spray milk when they get off. Most women are embarrassed when this happens, but at least MILK's wife will know the first time it happens that her husband isn't going to freak out about it.

Breast-feeding Educator's Sex Tips

Thanks for sharing, BEST.


CONFIDENTIAL TO AMERICAN LADIES: Republicans took the House of Representatives after campaigning on jobs, debt, and taxes. But it's been nonstop assaults on Planned Parenthood and reproductive freedom ever since. The GOP is always going on and on about how they want to shrink the size of government, and now we know why: They want to stuff the government in your vagina.

CONFIDENTIAL TO CANADIAN EVERYBODIES: Please go to www.shitharperdid.com, have a laugh, and then do what you can to send Stephen Harper packing or, failing that, deny him a majority. Pretty please?


Find the Savage Lovecast (my weekly podcast) every Tuesday at thestranger.com/savage.

mail@savagelove.net

 

Comments (183) RSS

Oldest First Unregistered On Registered On Add a comment
Sandiai 1
Great advice for HIV.
Posted by Sandiai on April 26, 2011 at 5:53 PM · Report this
2
It's virtually impossible to contract HIV through oral sex - giving or receiving - as, in the entire history of the virus, there have been fewer than five recorded cases of this happening. Rimjobs are the same.

While it is not difficult to get HIV through barebacking a poz bottom (with a high enough viral load), your best bet is simply this: don't let anyone come in your anus or vagina. Done.
Posted by ghassan on April 26, 2011 at 6:06 PM · Report this
3
For comparison purposes, SFMiP, here are some data regarding the chance of pregnancy within one year for those women who don't use any contraception method (not even withdrawal):

age 15-19: more than 70%
age 20-24: more than 45%
age 25-34: more than 30%
age 35+: about 15%

Taken from Figure 1 of "Measuring Contraceptive Use Patterns Among Teenage and Adult Women," Family Planning Perspectives, 1999; 31(2): 73-80. [paper available at http://www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/… ]

So, a surprisingly large fraction of people who aren't using any method still don't get pregnant within just one year.
Posted by feliquid on April 26, 2011 at 6:35 PM · Report this
4
Thank you thank you thank you for mentioning Harper and asking people to not vote for him. ANYONE BUT HARPER!!!
Posted by GreenCanuck on April 26, 2011 at 6:41 PM · Report this
Canuck 5
What kind of flying monkey would I be if I didn't already vote Green in the advance polls yesterday? (The Green party is the only one that puts LGBT rights on their platform.)
Posted by Canuck on April 26, 2011 at 6:44 PM · Report this
6
"Sex acts that expose you to his semen and/or blood are definitely unsafe, and sex acts that expose him to your semen and/or blood are mostly safe."

But what does "expose" mean in this context Dan?

HIV is a BLOOD disease- NOT (arguably)a sexually transmitted disease. To get HIV you need more than body-to-body contact. You need blood to blood or spooj to blood contact. Saliva does not work nearly as well for several reasons. Even if he bites you during a blowjob the chances of HIV are almost zero. You bleed OUT, NOT in! Also, the viral load in saliva is very low so kissing- even open mouth tongues- is probably fine.

#2 mostly explained the deal. You cannot get HIV from being exposed to even high viral load spooj on your skin or even in your (non-micro torn) Vagina. Problem for gay guys is while sweaty, dripping female gashes are pretty tough to tear, especially with just a tiny bit of gentleness (and lube) the butthole is a LOT more likely to have a micro-tear and thus transmit the virus when you inject fluid with HIV into the chamber. You don't have to bleed for a micro tear, it probably happens most of the time when you have anal sex but you going inside your sub is probably not a problem- even without a condom. If the sub is going to switch hit I would make him wear TWO condoms.

As for the infertile guy if he is really worried, you can get a sperm sample pretty easy and it is only about $150.00 to get a count even without insurance. I had no idea playing dump truck was so effective and I am not sure why so many of my friends in college got pregnant. Maybe he is just disciplined rather than infertile? I guess you could also switch holes at the last minute just like they do in the movies.

ER is absolutely crazy if he thinks his biggest worry with this girl is the needle play. I am guessing that ladies who do the BDSM scene and let themselves get tortured in public are, as Dan suggests, a whole lot more likely to have contracted an STD the old fashioned way. It is just an assumption but a good one, I think.

Actually the GOP stalwarts are afraid of Vaginas- they really want to stuff government up your ass.
More...
Posted by Professor on April 26, 2011 at 6:58 PM · Report this
7
Wow, SFMi could have been written by me. Five years, no birth control (other than withdrawal), no mistakes, and no pregnancies.
Posted by Ismene on April 26, 2011 at 7:12 PM · Report this
mydriasis 8
Hey Canuck, you're actually mistaken.
The NDP also list LGBT rights in their platform, if you look under section 5.13 "Promoting Equality Rights in Canada" (I checked, to make sure). And it's no secret that they're for LGBT rights, for example, they were big supporters of gay marriage when it was getting passed, if I remember correctly.
But hey, I wouldn't be complaining if the Green Party got elected, I'm just sayin'.
Posted by mydriasis on April 26, 2011 at 7:17 PM · Report this
9
Already been to shitharperdid.com
I would vote for him, but I still have three months before I'm 18.
Let's hope Jack Layton and Elizabeth May beat the crap out of him.
Posted by ddg on April 26, 2011 at 7:37 PM · Report this
10
Already been to shitharperdid.com
I would vote for him to leave, but I still have three months before I'm 18.
Let's hope Jack Layton and Elizabeth May beat the crap out of him.
Posted by ddg on April 26, 2011 at 7:42 PM · Report this
11
Well Mr Cunuck that depends

If you got a Tory in 1st or 2nd place and Mr or Mrs Green in a distant 3rd or 4th then you might very well be pissing your vote away on someone who cant win rather than supporting the Lib or NDP (im just guessing you aint a francophone from Quebec...)dude/dudess who might not be ideologically pure but can, you know, actually stop a bona fide homophobe winning.
Posted by neil83 on April 26, 2011 at 7:48 PM · Report this
saxfanatic 12
Shit Harper did? Priceless!

I am tremendously pleased by the surge of the NDP, but I'll again vote Liberal because their candidate in my riding is really good. Otherwise? I might have voted Green.
Posted by saxfanatic on April 26, 2011 at 8:00 PM · Report this
despicable me 13
People still use the withdrawal method as their only form of birth control?
Posted by despicable me on April 26, 2011 at 8:08 PM · Report this
14
Please please please please no Harper majority. Thanks Dan for remembering us!

Also @9 & 10, great that you'll be voting next time around.

And @11 I think Cunuck (sic) is a dudess...
Posted by North of 49 on April 26, 2011 at 8:10 PM · Report this
15
Canuck, the Liberals were the ones who passed gay marriage in 2005. They also stand the best chance of ousting Harper.

Problem is, there's 1 right-wing party and 3 left-wing parties in Canada right now. They'll split the vote and Harper will get back in. Wish Liberals and NDP would join forces . . .
Posted by Canadian eh? on April 26, 2011 at 8:26 PM · Report this
16
@6
The fact that you recommended using two condoms (which practically guarantees breakage) puts the entire remainder of your long post firmly in the unsubstantiated-opinion garbage bag.
Posted by Registered users are still anonymous... on April 26, 2011 at 8:36 PM · Report this
17
@16 Agreed. Plus he thought the "young lesbian" ER was a guy.

Posted by EricaP on April 26, 2011 at 8:48 PM · Report this
Oh Suzanna 18
I'm repeating @16 because I think what they said is worth reading even though the user is unregistered:

@6
The fact that you recommended using two condoms (which practically guarantees breakage) puts the entire remainder of your long post firmly in the unsubstantiated-opinion garbage bag.
Posted by Registered users are still anonymous...
Posted by Oh Suzanna on April 26, 2011 at 8:55 PM · Report this
Oh Suzanna 19
@17 you beat me to it on the male lesbian catch!
Posted by Oh Suzanna on April 26, 2011 at 8:57 PM · Report this
20
@13, yes people DO still use withdrawal as a primary/only form of birth control. And for some of those people, it's not even news that it IS an effective method. There is a bias against it in the medical profession, just like there is a bias against Fertility Awareness (reading body signals about ovulation which is NOT the same as rhythm method). There's no money in either of these methods for the medical industry. But if you're in a monogamous het. relationship and you've educated yourself, you know that these two methods combined can mean very very effective, no barrier, no hormone birth control. Dan's stats showing withdrawal as approaching the effectiveness of condoms wasn't news to me, but I'm ever grateful that he made it news to those who buy in to the BS propaganda against it.
Posted by listedasmygun on April 26, 2011 at 8:59 PM · Report this
21
The other reason the medical/educational industry has trouble teaching withdrawal is that effective withdrawal means careful attention to bodily sensation. Teaching effective condom use can be done with a banana and very detached, medical language. Teaching effective withdrawal requires a language/knowledge our culture of sexual shame just isn't capable of articulating comfortably. But just because people are ineffective at talking about it doesn't mean it's an ineffective method.
Posted by listedasmygun on April 26, 2011 at 9:08 PM · Report this
22
It's interesting hearing about people using pulling-out as birth control. I was always told that there is sperm in pre-come, so I should always use protection.
Posted by Makenna on April 26, 2011 at 9:12 PM · Report this
23
@22 yes there can be a miniscule amount of sperm in pre-come, but statistically speaking, you would have to be extremely unlucky to actually get pregnant from that (considering how many millions of sperm a "low sperm count" guy can have with no reproductive success).
Posted by Ismene on April 26, 2011 at 9:37 PM · Report this
24
I think the fact is: if you're absolutely terrified of abortion, absolutely not ready for children and/or your partner is unreliable, then withdrawal is not for you.
Posted by Ismene on April 26, 2011 at 9:39 PM · Report this
BigThickDk 25
My second child was conceived with just only Pre-cum but it took 6 years between the first and the second with my Ex-Wife. We used the withdrawal method for years and it was pretty effective if you do it right.

I thought that if you were considered Hetero-flexible you were pretty much a straight guy that would bang females mostly and an occasional shemale or get a blow job from a buddy after too much drinking? I think that HIV is more likely Homosexual or Homo-Flexible if there is such a thing (if there isn't then I get credit for coming up with a new term). Homo-Flexible: willing same sex "sugar-baby" that will perform sexual favors for gifts and money regardless of HIV status.....
Posted by BigThickDk on April 26, 2011 at 9:48 PM · Report this
26
To HIV, rule #1 is no swapping body fluids. Rule #2 is no swapping body fluids. Rule #3 is if in doubt, see rule 1 and rule 2.

*Protect your hands. Cuts on your cuticles? Scrapes or papercuts? Blue nitrile gloves are your friend.
*Protect your feet. If you have any cuts or sores or blisters, wear shoes.
*Treat any spilled body fluids (aka jizz on the floor) as hazmat. Bleach, lysol, or dettol to clean it up, and use a mop or a scrub brush so you don't touch it with your hands.
*Condoms on for everything...oral, frot, everything. The only exception is if he's masturbating in such a way that you will not get splashed.
*Saran wrap or a dental dam if you are rimming.
*Any penetrative toys, like buttplugs or dildos, should be wrapped in a condom before use. Non-penetrative toys, like gags, floggers, cock rings, etc, should be made out of a material that is easy to clean, and all toys should be cleaned with bleach/lysol/dettol after use.
*If you're whipping or flogging him, DO NOT DRAW BLOOD.
*Always use lots and lots of water-based lube...if you go dry, you risk tearing the tissues, which causes bleeding, which increases the likelihood of transmission.

If you do use toys, it's a good idea to use his toys, and ONLY his toys. You might use your toys on somebody else, so keep them separate.

A "body check" is a good idea...see if you or he have any cuts, sores, or wounds, and making sure they are covered by plastic bandages if possible. When not possible, avoid touching them. Don't forget mouth ulcers, either.

Something Dan didn't mention, and it's important, is that this isn't just for you, it's for your partner. If he's pos, then any of your bugs that are a minor annoyance to you can be very very bad for him...your snotty nose could be his pneumonia. Not breaking the skin when you flog him is so important, you don't want to have him get a wound that gets infected.

So, at the end of all of that, if you're wearing blue nitrile gloves, and you have a subbie who wants to have his mind fucked with, you could always get yourself a lab coat and play with your lab assistant. All kinds of experiments, in posture, positions, mixing "chemicals" for you (mmmmm, something non-oil-based to pour on him), measuring reactions...yeah.
More...
Posted by slinky on April 26, 2011 at 9:52 PM · Report this
Neptune 27
@20 You know, those stats were news to me. I didn't know that withdrawal could be roughly as effective as condoms, partially because, as Makenna said, I was always told that "even if the man pulls out, there could be sperm in his cleansing fluid OMG."

However, what I still don't understand, is why people would only use one method in the first place. If you're going to pull out, great, but why not use a condom, too? Or, like you said, why not use withdrawal AND fertility awareness (which I do know has the potential to be as effective as hormonal birth control)? Personally, I'm just too paranoid to be comfortable with only one method (I use the pill and condoms).

However, I think another reason the medical industry shies away from teaching these methods may be the main target audience of sex education: teenagers. If you tell a teenage boy that he can put on a condom before sex, or pull out before he finishes, he'd probably pick withdrawal, but he'd probably be less likely to fail with a condom. Right? But obviously I can see how adult relationships would benefit from being educated in both/all possible methods. I'd say there's a clear disconnect between that research and what most women are hearing from their OB/GYN when they ask about birth control options.
Posted by Neptune on April 26, 2011 at 10:10 PM · Report this
28
It's annoying when you weigh in on Canadian politics. You know nothing of Canadian politics.

In terms of gay rights, each and every Canadian party (except the Greens, who weren't around) has been against gay rights until very recently. It will make absolutely no difference to gay rights regardless of who is elected.

In Atlantic Canada, it is very difficult for women to get abortions, but the Conservatives never get elected in Atlantic Canada. Reproductive rights have nothing to do with the parties. All parties are equally useless on abortion rights. Again, you know nothing of Canadian politics.

Most rights related to sex, like abortion and many same sex rights, came about through the Supreme Court of Canada, and not the political parties.

And shitharperdid.com is just so much...shit.

I checked out the first link which said:

"In 2008, Linda Keen President of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission reported that the aging Chalk River nuclear facility was at a risk 1000 times greater than the international average. Harper quickly fired her."

But if you actually check, she was fired because she stopped the production of life-saving isotopes. Canada is the world's biggest producer. Her actions placed the lives of people all over the world in immediate danger. So, she was fired for being an idiot.

I do not care for the American perspective in politics, that misrepresents every act and position by the other side and attempts to smear them with lies.

Your influence can only bring the sort of idiot divisiveness that infects your country's politics. Please, shut up about Canadian politics.
More...
Posted by slidebone on April 26, 2011 at 10:21 PM · Report this
29
@ 26 - You do know that they make drugs to control paranoia nowadays right?

I've had two 3-year relationships with HIV+ guys, had thousands of sex partners, just followed two simple rules - no coming in the mouth, no anal without condoms - and I never got infected.

But frankly, I'm amazed that we still have to repeat this in 2011. On which planet have you been living all this time? And I'm not just talking to the LW.

Finally, please everyone, do yourselves a favour and don't listen to Professor. As others have pointed out, wearing two condoms is the easiest way to ensure that they break. That's serious misinformation he's spreading (I wonder if he could get arrested for that?).
Posted by Ricardo on April 26, 2011 at 10:23 PM · Report this
30
HIV seems like a pleasant enough person and the existence of heteroflexible people is doubtless a good thing, but I do hope he isn't being greedy and denying a young gay man of his age and level of attraction both a potentially much needed source of income and an experience that is likely to be of considerably greater utility to his future. If I'd had even one mentor when I was his age, I'd have turned out vastly better than I did, even without any cash changing hands and not counting how much better I might have become at sex. Maybe HIV will be so kind as to pass on any superfluous daddies to a gay friend.

And while I fully support the rights of straight-chasers to enjoy themselves in the manner of their choosing, and in the best case striaght chasing might lead to the construction of bridges we'd never see built by other means, it can make me so sad sometimes. I'm still really depressed about BILL who cheated with his partner's straight brother under rather meagre circumstances but still can't get over him and wants to repeat an encounter that might be likened to playing with a nuclear bomb.
Posted by vennominon on April 26, 2011 at 10:25 PM · Report this
31
@ 28 - I agree with your point about the Supreme Court, but you're extremely naive if you think that Harper cared about saving lives.
Posted by Ricardo on April 26, 2011 at 10:26 PM · Report this
32
@22 Makenna -

It seems there are some sperm in pre-come that can swim, according to one study of 27 men's pre-come published in 2011:
[ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21155… ].

I don't know what the risk of pregnancy from pre-come alone is (I haven't found any studies of this, likely because I imagine this would be difficult to study rigorously), but it's likely to be somewhere between 0% and 7-18% (the risk of pregnancy using the withdrawal method alone).
Posted by feliquid on April 26, 2011 at 10:36 PM · Report this
Canuck 33
mydriasis: Oh, my bad, I remembered reading that somewhere, that they were the only ones to specify it as part of their platform...NDP would be my second choice!

Neil83: This "dudess" used to vote Liberal, for those reasons, but now I'm hoping we can elect some Green MPs who'll put forth the kind of things I'd like to see in Parliament.

Canadian, eh?: If there were any kind of realistic chance of actually ousting Harper, I'd vote Liberal, of course. My sense from the polls is that we'll get another minority government with Harper leading it. I wish we could revisit the idea of a coalition, though. I think the Greens (and maybe NDP) are the only ones who will work to put forward anything that's truly progressive.

slidebone: If we Canadians can comment here on this US site, I think people in the States should be able to comment on Canadian politics, don't you? Telling people to vote is hardly being divisive, is it? Telling people to vote Harper out of office, oh my, what a strange thing to say on this lefty blog, who woulda thunk it?
Posted by Canuck on April 26, 2011 at 10:37 PM · Report this
34
Neptune and listedasmygun -

Based on the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth (data from 7,643 women), fertility awareness methods have a 23% risk of pregnancy within one year:
[ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles… ].

You seem to think it's more effective than this (Neptune, you compare it favorably with hormonal methods, which have a failure rate of about 9% in one year). Please share your data.
Posted by feliquid on April 26, 2011 at 10:45 PM · Report this
35
To SFMi: I have been in a couple of committed relationships, each lasting for several years. During all this time, I always used withdrawing as contraceptive method. I never got any of my previous partners pregnant. The trick is having some degree of control over your ejaculation and being able to tell when the semen is actually coming down the pipe and pull off on time. The actual withdrawing doesn't have to compromise the intensity of the orgasm and there are lots of cool things you can do with your load: she can jerk you off with using her hands or mouth, you can spray it all over her, remove a previously inserted butt blog and come into her ass, etc...
Posted by JJJRRR on April 26, 2011 at 10:53 PM · Report this
fannerz 36
@Canuck: The NDP made getting the batshit Exodus peeps off the charity list an actual platform mission. But I voted Green too :)
Posted by fannerz on April 26, 2011 at 11:08 PM · Report this
37
If you're using withdrawal as your primary means of birth control (and by primary, I mean only) be prepared to seek an abortion. Not saying that it'll necessarily happen, but if you absolutely cannot get an abortion (for example, you live in South Dakota or some equally Godforsaken state) you should probably consider using a condom or hormonal birth control as well. A previous partner and I used withdrawal as our primary means of birth control, I got pregnant three weeks later, got an abortion eight weeks after that, had an IUD inserted at the same time and that was that. I was like, well, guess that serves me right!

Also, I'm voting NDP because they have the best chance of beating the Conservative candidate in my closely-held riding. May 2nd!
Posted by KayElle on April 26, 2011 at 11:08 PM · Report this
Canuck 38
Woot, fannerz! And yeah, my vote is lost in my conservative riding, KayElle, just like my US vote is lost when I vote in Wyoming...but if there's a chance of ousting a Conservative, that's awesome, I'm really impressed with Jack Layton, as well as May.
Posted by Canuck on April 26, 2011 at 11:16 PM · Report this
39
Last comment tonight, and then I need to go to sleep...

So, it turns out that it's very difficult to assess the risk of catching HIV from oral sex that includes ejaculation. Here's a roundtable discussion of experts who cite data (and argue back and forth about all the pitfalls of epidemiologic data--one easy-to-understand problem is that people who have receptive oral sex often have anal sex as well, and infections get chalked up exclusively to the anal sex).
[ http://hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite?page=pr… ]

The risk of HIV transmission from oral sex plus ejaculation is probably not zero, and may account for 7% of all cases of HIV infection in the US (others even say 10-15%).
[Dillon B, Hecht FM, Swanson M, et al. Primary HIV infections associated with oral transmission. Program and abstracts of the 7th Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections; January 30-February 2, 2000; San Francisco, Calif. Abstract 473.]

The risk of oral sex WITHOUT ejaculation is also probably not zero, as there has been at least one case report of HIV transmission in this scenario--and HIV has been found in pre-come. The risk, though, likely isn't as high as fellatio WITH ejaculation.
[ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12286…]

I don't want to get into the data behind herpes and oral gonorrhea risk; like I said, I need sleep tonight.

In any case, my point is this: If you want to reduce your risk of infection, you must reduce your exposure to potentially-infectious body fluids and therefore must use a condom. Every time, every act. And get tested regularly, because nothing's perfect.
More...
Posted by feliquid on April 26, 2011 at 11:38 PM · Report this
40
I still have problem grasping the hetero-flexible thing.
Your answers are always spot on Dan.

Posted by chaya760 on April 26, 2011 at 11:38 PM · Report this
41
@33

"slidebone: If we Canadians can comment here on this US site, I think people in the States should be able to comment on Canadian politics, don't you?"

To generalize, no.

I think Americans can comment on Canadian politics if their comments are well-informed. Dan's comments are not well-informed. I would actually like to read a well-informed position on Canadian politics from an American (it would be a first). Canadians can' comment on American politics if Canadians are well-informed. Canadians are very informed on American politics. This is because we can't stand the US.

So my answer to your first question is generally no, Americans are generally too ignorant to comment on Canada.

"Telling people to vote is hardly being divisive, is it?"

You are right, telling people to vote is not divisive. You have made a statement I agree with. I suppose you think you have me on the run at this point, but no, it turns out I said that lying and misinformation was divisive, not merely telling people to vote.

"Telling people to vote Harper out of office, oh my, what a strange thing to say on this lefty blog, who woulda thunk it?"

It's not all that surprising that someone would say to vote Harper out of office. You are right. It's not that surprising that Dan link's to a site full of half-truths that distort Harper's record.

And it's not surprising that the site is crap. It's not surprising that supporters of Harper are made villains by hostile media.

But this is the mischaracterization and smearing that alienates both sides. What a waste. Even if it's no surprise.

Posted by slidebone on April 26, 2011 at 11:59 PM · Report this
42
I practiced the withdrawal method for three years with my previous partner and I'm going on two years with my current partner. (Both partners were / are 30+ years old, which may make it easier for them to exercise control, and I knew before we were sexually active that they were STD-free.) So far, there have been no pregnancy scares, let alone a pregnancy itself. I practiced FAM in the past and usually know when I'm ovulating, so I'm always extra careful around that time of month. I do admit to feeling sheepish about it and have told doctors that I'm using condoms when the subject of birth control has come up.

On the subject of pre-ejaculate, the last study I read said that pre-E does NOT contain viable sperm. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12286… As I understand it, there is a risk of pregnancy if a man ejaculates and then continues to have vaginal intercourse, but pre-E itself is safe.
Posted by thedreadfulbirds on April 27, 2011 at 12:11 AM · Report this
43
I practiced the withdrawal method for three years with my previous partner and I'm going on two years with my current partner. (Both partners were / are 30+ years old, which may make it easier for them to exercise control, and I knew before we were sexually active that they were STD-free.) So far, there have been no pregnancy scares, let alone a pregnancy itself. I practiced FAM in the past and usually know when I'm ovulating, so I'm always extra careful around that time of month. I do admit to feeling sheepish about it and have told doctors that I'm using condoms when the subject of birth control has come up.

On the subject of pre-ejaculate, the last study I read said that pre-E does NOT contain viable sperm. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12286… As I understand it, there is a risk of pregnancy if a man ejaculates and then continues to have vaginal intercourse, but pre-E itself is more or less safe.
Posted by thedreadfulbirds on April 27, 2011 at 12:15 AM · Report this
44
I practiced the withdrawal method for three years with my previous partner and I'm going on two years with my current partner. (Both partners were / are 30+ years old, which may make it easier for them to exercise control, and I knew before we were sexually active that they were STD-free.) So far, there have been no pregnancy scares, let alone a pregnancy itself. I practiced FAM in the past and usually know when I'm ovulating, so I'm always extra careful around that time of month. I do admit to feeling sheepish about it and have told doctors that I'm using condoms when the subject of birth control has come up.

On the subject of pre-ejaculate, the last study I read said that pre-E does NOT contain viable sperm. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12286… As I understand it, there is a risk of pregnancy if a man ejaculates and then continues to have vaginal intercourse, but pre-E itself is more or less safe.
Posted by thedreadfulbirds on April 27, 2011 at 12:17 AM · Report this
Canuck 45
Ah, slidebone, bashed again by the lamestream, homoliberal media? If you want an example of lying and smearing, you need look no further than your darling Harper himself:

Harper's government with 143 seats was brought down by 11 votes Friday in the 308-seat House of Commons on an unprecedented motion the Conservatives were in contempt of Parliament


Too bad you hate the States so much, you might be able to find work on Bachmann's campaign.

Posted by Canuck on April 27, 2011 at 12:31 AM · Report this
46
Apologies for the multiple posts. I'm still getting on my feet here . . .

Neptune says: "However, what I still don't understand, is why people would only use one method in the first place. If you're going to pull out, great, but why not use a condom, too?"

I can't speak for the greater, withdrawal-method population, but my reasons are tri-fold.

1. My family has a history of varicose veins, thrombosis, etc. One's risk of blood clots increases with the pill. Therefore, increased risk of blood clots + hereditary predisposition toward blot clots = no hormonal birth-control. Thanks.

2. I don't like the idea of hormonal birth control. I DO like being in touch with my body--and I DON'T mean that in a flaky, new-age sort of way. I can always tell when I'm PMSing, when I'm hours away from menstruating, when I'm close to ovulating. I prefer those symptoms remain unmasked. I don't want a pseudo-period.

3. The texture and smell of condoms kills the mood for me. More significantly, lubricated or unlubricated, condoms cut down on my own lubrication. I shopped around before throwing in the condom towel, too, but never found anything that minimised these problems. I used to scoff at people who complained about how condoms cut down on the tactile experience of sex. Though in my defense, I did use condoms in my teenage years and never had any difficulties.

Again, I have to stress that in my five years of using the withdrawal method, I've always been careful about the when and where of ejaculation.
Posted by thedreadfulbirds on April 27, 2011 at 12:40 AM · Report this
sissoucat 47
Withdrawing and condoms.

I'm using condoms with my current partner because I really don't want to get pregnant now, and I consider abortion as a last-measure mean, not as a mean of birth-control.

We're both monogamous and STI-tested and free. Since we are both past our prime, and experienced enough in our bodily sensations, we are only putting the condom on when we're ready for the finish. Still we sometimes have to use withdrawing when we get too carried away too soon.

I would not recommend this incorrect usage of condoms for inexperienced partners, partners of a younger age because of their much higher fertility, or before knowing the guy well enough to know he can be 100% trusted.

In 2+ years of this relationship I've not had a scare.
Posted by sissoucat on April 27, 2011 at 12:43 AM · Report this
Dan Filson 48
Put experts together and you get an argument like cats in a bag.

@Slinky (#26) - apart from his opening paragraph - goes wholly over the top, and suggests a kind of sterile sex that can only be 100% joyless - if you want sex with men in white coats wearing gloves and smelling of disinfectant, fine, but otherwise it's a bit bizarre.

I find @feliquid (#39) lacking in credibility despite citing a supporting study (which I have not read). "The risk of HIV transmission from oral sex plus ejaculation is probably not zero, and may account for 7% of all cases of HIV infection in the US (others even say 10-15%).

Why 7%? Why 10-15%? What on earth is the basis for these figures? The oral sex HIV infection figures should be presumably based on those HIV infected who swear absolutely blind that they have never had blood transfusions, never abused needles, never had any form of anal or vaginal sex and have never abused needles, and whose sole sexual practice has been oral sex. I find the statement "people who have receptive oral sex often have anal sex as well, and infections get chalked up exclusively to the anal sex" misses the point. Indeed some do. Nevertheless, for that reason to chalk up to oral sex infection a share of overall gay sex infections would be perverse if the infected person swears blind they never engaged in anal sex. People may indeed lie, but it's a bit sweeping to jump to assuming that oral sex statistics are therefore understated.

I have never tried doubling condoms, as putting one on is enough of a passion-killer (not the wearing, but the stopping to put in on) - for me it would be the final straw to creating a desensitised experience. I wonder whether breakage would be such a risk as is suggested; given the considerable strength of condoms, I would have thought slipping off of one of them more likely, assuming lubrication was used.

On pregnancy, I'm no expert, never having been remotely interested in trying, but it’s an area where bad science or bad use of statistics can get you into trouble. The average ejaculation has about 100 million sperm/ml, but about 10 million sperm pass through the cervical mucus, about 1 million make it to the top of the uterine tract, and just about 100,000 sperm reach the fallopian tubes. Thus, only a couple of sperm, assuming motility, would reach the fallopian tubes. Now take into account that pre-cum contains a very small amount of semen. Semen contains innumerable sperm, only a tiny proportion of which successfully make the journey to the female egg; of the fertilised eggs, only a tiny proportion successfully survive, which is why human multiple births are actually rare in nature. So the real problem with pre-cum and withdrawal is not to do with any statistically significant risk of becoming pregnant from the sperm in pre-cum; the problem is that the timing of withdrawal - unless you withdraw long, - long before any kind of orgasm - is critical and easy to get wrong. If worrying about when to withdraw, you risk spoiling the whole sexual experience.

Needles in group play? I would be deeply worried about anyone who plays with needles. What they are doing is getting relaxed in the company of needles in a pleasure situation. That to me would signal someone who may have abused – or may want to abuse - needles in connection with drugs, and therefore has serious risks of being or becoming HIV+.

Using the anus as a receptable for semen may indeed be a form of birth control, and is quite a widespread practice (30%+, I was surprised to learn). But it is also a good way of transmitting HIV especially for those unaware they are HIV+.

All forms of sex carry risks, some of diseases other than HIV, such as hepatitis. So rimming and to some extent oral sex is not risk free for the rimmer or receiver respectively.

Living in Seattle, it would be surprising if Dan Savage did not have view about Canada, which after all is closer to him than Washington DC by a couple of thousand miles. Nevertheless, it's over-egging it to have a comment thread that covers sex, sex, sex and Harper.
More...
Posted by Dan Filson on April 27, 2011 at 1:09 AM · Report this
49
Dear Dan,

Thank you for caring about the Canadian election and pimping shitharperdid.com. Harper is a monster who needs to be brought down. My husband and I live in Seattle but are voting via special ballot for Canadians abroad. We love you!
Posted by Amanda on April 27, 2011 at 1:13 AM · Report this
sissoucat 50
The only time I've heard of a condom being ineffective, it was about this psycho mother-of-one. She'd had her child with a guy whose girlfriend was pregnant at the time, in order, said she, to be sure that she'd be the only parent to the child and that no father would come and bother her in her parenting. OK, why not.

Then while she was for a few days in my house, she found out she was 1-month pregnant. She swore she'd used a condom for her one-night-stand, she swore it had not broken, she swore she'd even taken the morning-after pill, and yet nothing worked : she was away from home, and in a sorry need of an abortion. Why not keep the child, I asked her ? No way, she had loved the father of her first child, not this one, and she believed that kids should not be born when there's no love. Besides, I guess it would have complicated even more her post-doctoral studies.

I helped her out with the process, of course. Still I thought : does she really take the morning-after pill everytime she's having protected sex ? Yeah right. To be sure the condom broke or there was no condom.

And I'm sure she ended up in the statistics of the 2% of condoms correctly used that lead to pregnancy.
Posted by sissoucat on April 27, 2011 at 1:15 AM · Report this
sissoucat 51
@SFMi : I was told by a specialist in fertility treatments they consider a couple needs help only if, after 2 years of daily sex ending in semen in vagina, no pregnancy occurs.

Pregnancy is really random : it may happen at the first full intercourse, it may take up to 2 years, while still being normal. So, nothing to worry about in your case.
Posted by sissoucat on April 27, 2011 at 1:33 AM · Report this
52
I'm voting in an historically strong Liberal riding that went Conservative in the last election by a very small margin. While it's going to come down to the Liberals or the Tories in that riding, I'm voting NDP. I considered casting a strategic Liberal vote just to hurt the Tories' chance of winning another riding, but I love Jack Layton too much not to vote for him. And Iggy's too big of a douche.
Posted by Amanda on April 27, 2011 at 1:33 AM · Report this
sissoucat 53
@48 : I agree with you about condom slipping, that happened twice to my partner, before he understood that he had to wipe my lady fluids of his cucumber first. Condom breaking, never.
Posted by sissoucat on April 27, 2011 at 1:39 AM · Report this
sissoucat 54
off his cucumber.
Posted by sissoucat on April 27, 2011 at 1:41 AM · Report this
55
Please please please, Canada, send Harper packing.

This man is possibly one of the scariest men in Canada; every bit as batshit as the southern baptists, but shrewd enough to engage in the worst type of incremental conservatism. If he has his way Canada will become far right of Bush era America.

If you are Canadian and a proponent of Women's rights, LGBTQ rights, Human Rights, Sane harm reduction policy, sane criminal justice policy and an economic policy that doesn't involve turning Canada into a Saudi-style oil monarchy, please send Harper a message and vote... for anyone else.
Posted by dan85 on April 27, 2011 at 2:50 AM · Report this
56
Amanda@52

I agree...Iggy is a douche...really don't want him getting in either...

Posted by beec on April 27, 2011 at 2:59 AM · Report this
57
While HIV may not be easily transmitted from a rimjob, the same cannot be said of other viruses. Hepatitis is readily transmitted and I feel it is irresponsible not to mention when answering that question.
Posted by gfa2000 on April 27, 2011 at 5:06 AM · Report this
58
While rimjobs may be safe regarding HIV transmission, there are plenty of other health concerns and viruses that can be transmitted. I think it is irresponsible not to mention concerns of hepatitis, for example, when answering that question. Many HIV patients are infected with hepatitis as well, so rimjobs should not be undertaken unless HIVs partern has been tested.
Posted by gfa2000 on April 27, 2011 at 5:14 AM · Report this
59 Comment Pulled (Spam) Comment Policy
shahnahnah 60
When I was younger (and dumber), a boyfriend and I had unprotected sex without even using withdrawal for a year and a half before I finally got pregnant. And no, we weren't trying to get pregnant. Hence the dumb part. Suffice to say, I guess we just hadn't done it right when my egg was ready and waiting up until that point.
Posted by shahnahnah on April 27, 2011 at 7:01 AM · Report this
61
vennominon at 30 is advocating suckoff socialism, it seems: if you have lots of something good then you must be obliged to hand them over to somebody who they feel deserves it more. ;)
Posted by seeker6079 on April 27, 2011 at 7:19 AM · Report this
62
@ 45 - The funny thing is, slidebone doesn't seem to know much about Canadian politics either. Which is probably why his/her arguments are of the "Americans are ignorant" variety.
Posted by Ricardo on April 27, 2011 at 7:20 AM · Report this
Charm 63
I'll be doing my part to keep Harper from the majority.
Posted by Charm on April 27, 2011 at 7:24 AM · Report this
64
@3 That's interesting. I didn't know that. So, basically, teenage bodies want to have babies!
Posted by Jamie in Pittsburgh http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/strawberry.limonade?ref=name on April 27, 2011 at 8:06 AM · Report this
65
For SFMi and any men who do not wish to impregnate women:

If you really want to actively avoid getting a woman pregnant, add a daily soak in a hot bath to your routine. A hot bath will kill sperm, making you temporarily infertile. To reverse the infertility, stop taking the hot baths and wear boxers. Easy, inexpensive and effective!
Posted by Used this method for the last 20 years on April 27, 2011 at 8:36 AM · Report this
John Horstman 66
@6: NO NO NO. This is potentially-dangerous misinformation. HIV can (possibly) infect epidermal cells - the jury's still out, as there are conflicting studies on the role of Langerhans cells. As far as we know, the mucous membranes of the penis (in the foreskin, and possibly in the portion that remains after circumcision in circumcised men) and vagina provide a vector for HIV transmission even without tearing, though it's a less-effective vector than HIV-containing fluid coming into contact with the blood stream.

See: http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl…

And: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langerhans_…

That said, semen or blood contact with the unbroken epidermis (in most places on the body) is basically no-risk, and there have been almost no confirmed cases of oral HIV transmission (the ones that are confirmed involved people with cuts or sores in the oral cavity).
Posted by John Horstman on April 27, 2011 at 8:42 AM · Report this
67
Hormonal birth control sucks (and kills your sex drive). But take hope! If you absolutely aren't ready for a child and would strongly prefer to avoid an abortion, get an IUD. Sure you will have heavier periods and a bit more cramping the first few months, but you'll be enjoying your resurgent sex drive so much you'll hardly notice.

IUDs have a bad rap but every woman I've known to take the leap and get one has been thrilled with the choice.
Posted by wxPDX on April 27, 2011 at 9:26 AM · Report this
Adam_west 68
@66 you are right, 6 is confused and dangerously wrong. HIV is a blood disease sure, but it infects cd4 cells, or T helper cells, which are White blood cells. White blood cells are not restricted to blood, they are excreteted at all mucous membranes and into most body fluids. There are certainly thought to be exposed cd4 receptors below the glans of the penis and on the inside of the foreskin. (Although the evidence that transmission rates are lower in circumcised men is tenuous at best)

There is also very convincing evidence that having additional stds massively raises your chance of contracting HIV. So get yourself and partner checked very regularly.

Dan's advice is spot on.
Posted by Adam_west on April 27, 2011 at 9:45 AM · Report this
despicable me 69
@20, exactly what part of my comment ticked you off? I'm not buying into any BS propaganda about any form of birth control, I was simply voicing my complete surprise that the withdrawal method is still used and effective.
Posted by despicable me on April 27, 2011 at 9:52 AM · Report this
70
feliquid@34, I read the article you cited, but their stats on FAM were poor. They lumped together "rhythm-, calendar-, mucus-, and temperature-methods," along with "periodic abstinence or natural family planning." (p4) And even so, they only found 236 such respondents, compared with 2500 on the pill and 3800 using condoms. (p.16)

FAM is a highly effective way of preventing or promoting pregnancy, but you have to chart (daily) at least two of the following: basal body temperature, cervical mucus, and cervical position. (And you have to avoid PIV sex or use another form of birth control during your fertile days.) If respondents thought that by counting days since their last period, they knew when they'd be fertile, that's not using FAM. That's like people using water balloons for condoms.

Wiki says: "several studies have found actual failure rates of 2-3% per year," though I haven't checked their sources. For neurotic, educated people, I think it's reasonable to think results would be like the pill in effectiveness. Of course, like the pill, FAM doesn't provide any protection against STIs.
Posted by EricaP on April 27, 2011 at 9:57 AM · Report this
71
@45

Well, except for the insults, you have made an argument (without actually addressing any of my arguments).

But, yes, Harper needs to be transparent. Just keep in mind that the (Sponsorship Scandal) Liberals are the likely alternative. So explain just why I should hate on Harper relative to the alternatives.

I think Harper has some bad policies, like his tough-on-crime agenda. It's a stupid policy. But the other parties are quite bad on this too. Inmate abuse at prison facilities exists right now. Access to justice is a joke. The programs to reintegrate inmates into society don't work. And even though the Harper government wants mandatory minimums, in fact, the system encourages a pattern where the same guys keep getting incarcerated and are in effect permanently in institutions anyways.

None of the parties have solutions to these problems. So, again, I don't like Harper's policy, but sorry, he is not a villain when compared to the other candidates.

Sites like Shitharperdid are an insult to anyone with any critical faculties.

This kind of angry politics usually means that the real issues get ignored. And I see it as an American influence (think Triggers, teapartiers, birthers, truthers). Look at the anger that Mr. Savage stirs up when he wades into politics. We don't need it.

@62

You say I don't know much. But I make arguments and then support them with evidence.

You on the other hand, you make insulting claims, with no evidence or argument.

Are you arguing that Americans aren't ignorant on Canadian politics? I mean, Rick Mercer had a regular bit where he documented US ignorance of Canada, with Mike Huckabee, GWB, and ordinary Americans as the victims. Obama wanted to "take a hammer" to the NAFTA until he found out that Canada was the US's biggest trading partner. He literally had no idea.

Even Dan himself has said that he doesn't know a lot about Canadian politics.
More...
Posted by slidebone on April 27, 2011 at 9:58 AM · Report this
Stiny 72
The reason why medical PROVIDERS don't like to teach about withdrawal/fertility awareness is this: yes, there is sperm in the pre-ejaculate, and lots of women don't have clear fertility signs or have irregular periods. I would consider myself a poor medical practitioner if I didn't strongly encourage a woman who did not want to get pregnant to use something more reliable, such as the Pill, or even better, an IUD or implant.

Somehow, I don't think that the LW and his girlfriend are trying NOT to get pregnant.
Posted by Stiny on April 27, 2011 at 9:58 AM · Report this
73
Sorry, FAM = fertility awareness methods
Posted by EricaP on April 27, 2011 at 9:58 AM · Report this
74
@67 Not disputing your experience, but the pill is great for me, doesn't mess with my libido at all. What messes with my libido are the heavy, ten-day-long, irregular, painful periods I have when I'm off the pill.
Posted by EricaP on April 27, 2011 at 10:05 AM · Report this
Backyard Bombardier 75
@62 et al: Slidebone is clearly a Harper shill, a moron, or both. His grossly distorted representation @28 regarding the firing of Linda Keen demonstrates that.

As to the Canadian election, I urge any Canadian voter who is reading this and who is interested in preventing a Harper majority to visit the Catch 22 Campaign web site. This group has identified fifty key ridings where the incumbent - Tory or other party - is particularly vulnerable, and it provides strategic voting recommendations, based on poll results, to ensure the seat does not go to the Conservative candidate in this election.

Like it or not, with four parties in Parliament plus the Greens, we live in a time where strategic voting is essential. If you live in one of these ridings - or know someone who does - please think carefully before you cast your ballot. Staying ideologically pure and voting for a no-hoper will not make five years of a Harper majority any more enjoyable for you.
Posted by Backyard Bombardier on April 27, 2011 at 10:05 AM · Report this
76
@67 I'm on Nuvaring and I love it. I cringe thinking about what life was like without it. My sister got her IUD removed after an ectopic pregnancy. Everybody's different.
Posted by Amanda on April 27, 2011 at 10:31 AM · Report this
77
@ 71 - OK, I take that back, you're just ignorant about politics in general. You take things at face value and thoroughly fail to see the hidden agenda. That's so... Canadian in its naivety.

Your reading skills are also dubious - or perhaps it's paranoia, a very Canadian trait due to an obvious national inferiority complex (Anglo Canadians feel inferior to the US, the Québécois feel inferior to the French) - but I never said that Americans know about Canadian politics. That would be silly. No one else in the WORLD cares about Canadian politics. It's probably the single least talked about country in the international press.

What I meant was that if you can't come up with better arguments than "Americans are ignorant", then your capacity to argue intelligently is nil - at least on this subject.

By the way, before you go on a misguided rant, I'm not American.
Posted by Ricardo on April 27, 2011 at 10:41 AM · Report this
78
I think pulling out should be a art form. It works!! Been doing it with my girl friend for years, she loves the sticky stuff all over her!!
Posted by k.pascoe on April 27, 2011 at 11:10 AM · Report this
79
WHY does this idiot want to have a baby with someone he isn't married to? Marriage is too big of a committment but raising a child together is NOT? How disgusting to have such a lackadaisical attitude towards bringing another human being into the world who wil be COMPLETELY dependent on him: "Oh well if it happens it happens." Sounds like another kid the taxpayers are going to end up paying for. I HOPE this dufus infertile!
Posted by koshkamat on April 27, 2011 at 11:14 AM · Report this
80
Pulling out should be a art form. My girlfiend and I are always trying to come up with new ideas for money shots!!! I came up with new one last weekend. It should be fun.
BTW-It does work!!
Posted by k.pascoe on April 27, 2011 at 11:18 AM · Report this
81
oops !!! double post I thought the first got lost
Posted by k.pascoe on April 27, 2011 at 11:20 AM · Report this
82
As an aside, the podcast answer to the guy who didn't want to keep dating the single mother with a kid: total fail, Mr. Savage.

Why the hell guilt trip a guy for not agreeing to raise another man's child? Not. his. responsibility.

Move on, dude. Don't let a gay advice columnist try to gender shame you ("man up") into taking on a woman's bad decisions about single motherhood.
Posted by How about a board for the podcast? on April 27, 2011 at 11:36 AM · Report this
83
As an aside, the podcast answer to the guy who didn't want to keep dating the single mother with a kid: total fail, Mr. Savage.

Why the hell guilt trip a guy for not agreeing to raise another man's child? Not. his. responsibility.

Move on, dude. Don't let a gay advice columnist try to gender shame you ("man up") into taking on a woman's bad decisions about single motherhood.
Posted by How about a board for the podcast? on April 27, 2011 at 11:37 AM · Report this
84
@48, you should at least look at the provided link before asserting that @39's comment lacks credibility. UCSF is one of the best biology research centers in the world, and even if you don't understand their methodology (without even bothering to find out what it is!) it is still a credible study. Allow me to provide another source, from Columbia University, which I'm sure you will also not read: http://health.columbia.edu/files/healths…. This provides basic facts, including risks associated with fellatio. On the flip side, page 36 has a table that lists risks of infection from a single sexual encounter with an HIV-positive partner, and these risks are very low. Obviously, this doesn't mean it's okay for people to be reckless; it just illustrates that the HIV virus is not actually a very robust one.
Posted by chicago girl on April 27, 2011 at 11:45 AM · Report this
seandr 85
If you take a little time each day to monitor various aspects of a woman's body (waking temperature, viscosity of vaginal fluids, etc), you can tell exactly when she is ovulating.

That means you fuck without birth control during the entire time window between her period and the point of ovulation, and you can be extra careful once she's ovulated.
Posted by seandr on April 27, 2011 at 12:04 PM · Report this
86
Slidebone makes arguments and backs them up? Hardly.

"The Conservatives never get elected in Atlantic Canada". Actually the Conservatives have MP's from 3 of the 4 Atlantic provinces, the most prominent of whom is Peter Mackay (the Minister of Defence in the outgoing government, and extremely high profile). The lack of MP's in the fourth is a historic anomaly because the Conservative government of that province campaigned against the federal Conservatives last election. In the current election, polls put the Conservatives in the lead in Atlantic Canada.

To put this in US context, the best analogy I can think of would be saying "the Republicans never get elected in California." It's just bizarre.

It's not expected that GBLT rights will be an issue in the next parliament. However, the NDP were the first major (i.e. has elected MPs) party to support the right of gays to marry, it got passed when most of the Liberals came on board, and the Conservatives fought it until even some Conservatives were telling the others that the public were tired of them beating the dead horse. Further, there's a fairly high profile gay politician (Scott Brison) who left the Conservatives and joined the Liberals because of the different attitudes towards gays among the two groups of politicians. I think I'd go with Scott Brison's opinion on the GBLT-friendliness of the different parties over "Sliderule"'s.

For abortion rights, I doubt that anyone will actively ban abortions for Canadian women in the near future. However, the Conservatives are fond of tying grants for foreign aid for NGO's to restrictions that the NGO not use the money to provide abortions, a restriction that none of the other significant parties would want to make. No party is likely to ban abortions because doing so would get them wiped out in the next election. However, the Conservatives are a party that evangelical Christians can feel at home in, while the NDP are a party that women's studies majors can feel at home in. The parties are definitely not the same.

As for Linda Keen, she was fired because she would have shut down an unsafe nuclear reactor, although shutting down that reactor would have reduced the production of isotopes used for medical purposes. It's not one explanation or the other is true: both are true. The Conservatives gambled that technical problems at an unsafe reactor could be managed and, happily, they won their gamble. However, presenting the issue as if the production of medical isotopes was the only consideration is framing it in a way only a right-wing partisan would.

I think a safe overview is that, in practice, Harper governs to the left of Obama because Harper has to play to an electorate that's far to the left of him. However, if Harper were in the States, he'd be completely comfortable among tea party types. If I had to choose between Prime Minister Huckabee and Prime Minister Harper, I'd pick Huckabee, as the lesser evil, in a heartbeat.

I stopped reading "Slidebone"'s comments after the first one, the "Conservatives never get elected in Atlantic Canada" comment was just too ignorant to take the guy seriously any more. But I'd go with Dan's knowledge of Canadian politics over his.
More...
Posted by Old Crow on April 27, 2011 at 12:26 PM · Report this
87
@85, yes, except for one huge caveat: you need to use another form of birth control for about 3 days before ovulation as well. That's why you have to chart for a few months before relying on it: you need to be able to predict ovulation accurately, so you can avoid a window around it. (Unless you're trying to GET pregnant, in which case you have to aim for that window.)

sex 1 day before ovulation = high likelihood of getting pregnant.
Posted by EricaP on April 27, 2011 at 12:53 PM · Report this
mydriasis 88
@20/21

I know people hate doctors a lot and stuff but give them a little slack.

1. Sex ed (maybe I'm biased because I'm Canadian) is generally taught to TEENAGERS who aren't exactly fantastic at controlling when they ejaculate. Though mature adults who have been having sex for a while might be able to maintain "perfect use" of the withdrawl method (the fairly decent, but still less effective than condoms 4%) they are more likely to practice "imperfect use" which means roughly 1 in 5 getting pregnant. Another reason that condoms are suggested is because they protect against STIs. Again! For teenagers this is very important. For a married couple with kids it is (hopefully) not so important. Sex ed is taught with a teenager-centric slant, not a selling-condoms slant. Jeez.

2. I like how people are talking about the rhythm method like it's a good idea. Maybe it's effective but you have to not have sex while you're ovulating OR on your period. That leaves... what like a third of the month to have sex? Besides, women are most likely to WANT to have sex WHEN they're ovulating. And people think condoms take the fun out of sex?
Posted by mydriasis on April 27, 2011 at 12:55 PM · Report this
Canuck 89
Thanks, Backyard B, I'm going to figure out what riding my son is in (he just moved, somewhere between downtown and Burnaby...)
Posted by Canuck on April 27, 2011 at 12:59 PM · Report this
Backyard Bombardier 90
@88: To be fair, the rhythm method doesn't mean no sex when you are ovulating; it means no penis-in-vagina when you are ovulating.

You call it ovulation. I call it "Blow Job Week!"

(And... no sex during your period? That's just wrong.)

Posted by Backyard Bombardier on April 27, 2011 at 1:10 PM · Report this
91
@89: try http://www.vancouversun.com/news/winners…

If he's in Van East, that's arguably the safest NDP riding in Canada, but if he's actually in north Burnaby (Burnaby-Douglas), that's a nailbiter between the NDP and the Conservatives.
Posted by Old Crow on April 27, 2011 at 1:26 PM · Report this
92
@88/90 - you can't use cervical mucus as a signal during your period, but if you've been charting a while you know how far away ovulation is, so (unless they are very irregular) most women could have PIV sex all but one week of the month -- that window of a few days on each side of ovulation.

Also, please don't call FAM the rhythm method: the rhythm method is an ineffective calendar-based method, just counting days. FAM involves reading your body, not the calendar.
Posted by EricaP on April 27, 2011 at 1:34 PM · Report this
93
Of course you can have PIV sex even during the fertile window; you just need to use condoms then.
Posted by EricaP on April 27, 2011 at 1:36 PM · Report this
94
FWIW, I used FAM/charting to get pregnant, once my fertility had declined (in my 30s) so it wasn't as easy as just stopping birth control. If it weren't for my deep and enduring love of the pill I would totally continue charting. I highly recommend that anyone who is not on hormonal birth control try charting for a few months, just to see what it's all about. Just print out a few copies of the chart at http://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/P… and get a special basal thermometer ($10 @Amazon), and you're all set to learn how your body works and when it is fertile.
Posted by EricaP on April 27, 2011 at 1:44 PM · Report this
95
Glad to see someone giving the facts about withdrawal. The bf and I have been using it for 17 months without mishap (well, except for semen in his eye that one time, but that's not really relevant here.) It really depends on how much discipline and awareness the guy has - I would never recommend it to teenagers or anyone sexually inexperienced, and I'd recommend having emergency contraception around in case of an "oops." All the reliable sources I've read say that there's no viable sperm in pre-come, but that if he's come recently there may still be viable sperm hanging around from that.
Posted by Ginny http://irenarowley.wordpress.com on April 27, 2011 at 1:55 PM · Report this
96
Hi EricaP! Good point about that survey data I posted; I clearly didn't read it closely enough to prevent a case of foot-in-mouth.

I have fallen further down the PubMed rabbit hole, though:

The most-effective study I found was from Germany [ see table VII from http://www.familienplanung-natuerlich.de… ], where if the symptothermic (STM) method of FAM was used perfectly (defined as either abstinence or condom use in the fertile time), rate of pregnancy was 0.4-0.5% per year. However, if there was imperfect use (either unprotected sex or intermittent condom use during the fertile time), pregnancy rates jumped to 2.2-7.5%. This imperfect use rate of STM does compare favorably to imperfect use of the pill, for instance.

However, if you look at figure 4, of the 900 women who started the study, 466 women (51.8%) dropped out of the study by 13 cycles (one year, roughly). 9.2% of the total had dropped out by that time due to dissatisfaction with the method (table VII), 6.73% were lost to followup, and the remaining 35.9% left the study for other reasons. As the authors of the German study say, "The markedly high use-effectiveness rates of our
data may partly be explained by the motivation of those couples and their teachers who agreed to participate in the study." That's a really high dropout rate...the fantastic numbers they cite would not have survived intention-to-treat analysis.

The German authors go on to say, "When comparing different methods of family planning, method effectiveness rates are more frequently quoted than the use-effectiveness rates which are strongly dependent on the selection of the study population."

As an example of how success with STM varies by population, there's another study from California that showed a failure rate of 16.6% at one year--higher than the pill. It had a similar dropout rate of >50%.
[ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/70256… ]

I don't have a primary care practice anymore, but if a woman asked me about pregnancy prevention, I would talk about both withdrawal and the symptothermic method as viable options for preventing pregnancy; as the numbers show, they can be better than no method. As others have pointed out above, every woman is different--some find that hormones kill their libidoes, others have a higher-than-typical risk of blood clots, some want permanent sterilization, others have philosophical or religious values that help them decide against pills/IUDs/surgery.... My job is to help my patients share with me the factors that influence their decisions, and then to share with them the data they need to help make decisions. That's pretty much it.
More...
Posted by feliquid on April 27, 2011 at 2:16 PM · Report this
Canuck 97
Old Crow, I just entered his postal code, and it says Vancouver Kingsway...still NDP?

Backyard B, "blow job week,"....niiice. ;)
Posted by Canuck on April 27, 2011 at 2:17 PM · Report this
98
@48 Dan Filson -

No-thank-you for that ad hominem attack. If you want to know my credentials, why not ask me?

FYI, I'm an attending physician, board-certified in internal medicine, at a large urban teaching hospital. I do not have special training in HIV--though I do take care of many HIV+ patients--but I absolutely can review studies, extract data, and form conclusions, because that's my job and I've been trained to do it.
Posted by feliquid on April 27, 2011 at 2:21 PM · Report this
mydriasis 99
@90

You got me! I admit it, I'm all about the PIV sex, since it's how I get off (fancy that).
I think every week should be blowjob week - but not because I'm not allowed to get off, that's no fun.

I don't like to have sex when I'm on my period! We accept all kinds of deviants but not the kind who like cleanliness when they're getting dirty? Come on now...

My birth control/preference combo means that only one week out of three months (or 8% of the time) is PIV-free. Which I like!
Posted by mydriasis on April 27, 2011 at 2:27 PM · Report this
Backyard Bombardier 100
@97: I'd stick with the NDP in Vancouver-Kingsway. (And I suppose I could have gone with "Oral Week" - never meant to suggest things couldn't go both ways.)

@99: Don't look at it as a "can't get off" week - look at it as "find new ways to get off" week instead.
Posted by Backyard Bombardier on April 27, 2011 at 2:31 PM · Report this
101
My wife and I used withdrawal for 2 months- BAM!- baby #3. We tried for baby #1 for 1 month. Baby #2 we tried for 2 months. We must be really fertile, because I withdrew pretty well every time during that 2 months. Baby #3 is quite a miracle...
Posted by Oolagah on April 27, 2011 at 2:38 PM · Report this
O my Captain 102
I think it's irresponsible to encourage or even support couples who want to attempt to "withdraw" as a form of birth control. I won't even dignify it by calling it a "method". There's only one practice I consider more risky... and that would be the so-called rhythm technique.
Posted by O my Captain on April 27, 2011 at 2:41 PM · Report this
Backyard Bombardier 103
@102: There is a whole range of birth control options, ranging from spray-and-pray to sterilization. Each has different advantages and disadvantages; each has its own level of effectiveness. Each couple will choose the method that suits them and their risk tolerance for accidental pregnancy.

For some couples, the advantages of withdrawal (easy; spontaneous; no hormonal issues; etc.) are worth the higher risk of accidental pregnancy. I've used it at times when my partner and I weren't trying to get pregnant, but were willing to accept becoming pregnant.

I'd never use it for a one-nighter or in any situation where pregnancy was not. An. Option. But there are times when it is a reasonable choice.
Posted by Backyard Bombardier on April 27, 2011 at 2:47 PM · Report this
104
@ Old Crow

I am not right-wing. However, I can't stand the fear mongering against Harper. He will not do the terrible things that some claim, and the other parties will not do the good that is attributed to them.

Okay, it's true that Conservatives are not NEVER elected in Atlantic Canada. I admit that sentence was sloppy. However, they do not hold a majority of seats here. You've made a lot of hay about a sentence that was never crucial to my argument. My point stands that no political party is going to take on the issue of better access to abortion in Atlantic Canada. This was my point. The other parties have had the chance to act and have not acted. This is true regardless of the party.

It's true that the Conservatives have been the most resistant to gay rights. But the history of all the parties has been disgraceful on gay rights over the last 15 years. All parties made comments against gay people that would today be considered unacceptable. That history still matters. This doesn't make Harper the devil and the other parties saints.

Your final point is really pretty unfair. It is the shitharperdid website that is hyperpartisan. It doesn't even mention the isotopes or any information that would indicate that there were two sides to the argument. As you would say, it is framed as only a hyper-partisan would frame it.

I pointed out the other side. It does not make me a right-wing partisan to point out the other side of an argument.

Another example of the shrill rhetoric against Harper is that he will stack the Supreme Court with right wing judges. This is pretty laughable in Canada. I'll go out on a limb and say that we don't have any right-wing judges in Canada to choose from. Harper appointed Crowmell, who if anything, has been to the left. It doesn't make me a right-winger to recognize that people are fear-mongering against Harper.

As you say, Harper can't get away with pushing a socially conservative agenda, if that's what he wants, because he would be thrown out of power. He may make grand gestures as a dog-whistle to social conservatives. But unlike in the US, he will not be able to remake Canada (if he wanted to) into some social conservative paradise. In practice it is a non-issue.

If you're voting in principle, then you shouldn't vote for any party but the Greens, who had the good fortune of not existing when the other parties were more openly homophobic. All gay politicians are members of parties that were until recently avowedly homophobic (ie. had MPs that said homophobic things)

I doubt you or anyone will listen, but I am an undecided voter. I feel no strong commitment or hostility to any party. I would be willing to vote for any party, depending on the circumstances.

I like that the economy is relatively stable, considering the recent economic crises. I like how Harper has handled our relationship with the US. But I don't like some other policies, for instance the way that police handled the G-20, and the overspending on the G-20. But I'm not sure that the Liberals wouldn't have behaved similarly.

But let me guess, "If you are not with us, you must be against us."
More...
Posted by slidebone on April 27, 2011 at 2:50 PM · Report this
105
@96 - "every woman is different" Absolutely. But there's no downside to encouraging a woman to look at her vagina, cervix, and cervical mucus and get to know what's normal for her body.
Posted by EricaP on April 27, 2011 at 3:08 PM · Report this
Backyard Bombardier 106
@104: " But the history of all the parties has been disgraceful on gay rights over the last 15 years."

No. "All the parties"? "Last 15 years"? Just.... no.

If that is your honestly held belief, then you really don't know a thing about Canadian politics over the last fifteen years.
Posted by Backyard Bombardier on April 27, 2011 at 3:13 PM · Report this
107
@106

The information I am basing this on is Tom Warner's book, Never Going Back, a really good history of gay rights in Canada. He documents and concludes that yes, the Conservatives were the worst, but the Liberals and NDP were bad on gay rights. All the parties had homophobic members. It took real arm twisting to get the parties to back gay rights and it was a product of a long campaign of concerted pressure and court victories. He concludes that political parties in general (all of them) can't be trusted on gay rights.

The Wikipedia article you link to never refers to his book. In fact, it doesn't footnote to any books at all.
Posted by slidebone on April 27, 2011 at 3:35 PM · Report this
Backyard Bombardier 108
Double posting to add this:

@104: "As you say, Harper can't get away with pushing a socially conservative agenda, if that's what he wants, because he would be thrown out of power."

No. Harper hasn't gotten away with it to date because he has only had minority governments. Give him a majority and watch out for more of this sort of thing. (Thanks for the link, Canuck.)

If you want to know what Harper will do with a majority, google Tom Flanagan.
Posted by Backyard Bombardier on April 27, 2011 at 3:37 PM · Report this
109
MORE DATA on the risk of getting HIV from oral sex! I hope you're excited!

This study (which as chicago girl notes, is cited in that table in the Columbia AIDS handbook) uses a modified Bernoulli model to estimate the risk of each single episode of oral sex WITH ejaculation as 0.04%. To put that in perspective, it's:
- only 6.75 times less risky than being an unprotected bottom for a top whose HIV status you don't know (0.27%)
- 20 times less risky than being an unprotected bottom for an HIV+ partner (0.8%).
That is, NOT zero. And don't blow off this number just because it seems low for ONE EPISODE--think of HOW MANY TIMES you've swallowed in your whole life! And, you could always get unlucky with your very first blowjob.
[ http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/15… ]

This study shows that the population attributable risk of oral sex WITH ejaculation is about 7%, based on multivariate analysis. To define population attributable risk, if everyone stopped swallowing come, then the incidence of HIV would drop about 7%.
[ http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15851… ]

I posted that UCSF roundtable to give people (those who read it, of course) an idea of how difficult it is to tease out one risk factor from another, and how hard it is to get good data. And then, one can always view the data from various perspectives (is twenty times less risky than being the bottom of an HIV+ partner "low," "very low," or "exceedingly low"? Or imho, just "lower"?)

That's the data, folks.
Posted by feliquid on April 27, 2011 at 4:02 PM · Report this
110
@11: "then you might very well be pissing your vote away on someone who cant win"

Here's my reason for voting Green in a nutshell:

1. I think all politicians are lying assholes who will do anything for power. Exhibit a: campaign advertising (clearly, these people are assholes, and it's pretty apparent they're lying too). Exhibit b: everything they do when they get power; namely, nothing they *said* they would do in their asshole lying campaign advertising.

2. Because of 1, I would feel pretty bad if I voted for a lying asshole who got in, and they turned out to be a complete asshole.

3. Because of 2, I would *never* in a million years hold my nose while I voted for someone who I *knew* was a lying asshole, just so some other lying asshole *wouldn't* get in. How do I know that one lying asshole is no better than the other lying asshole? See 1.

4. So I started voting Green because I knew they hadn't a hope in hell. They still had thorough fringe-party status back then.

5. After I started voting Green, I found that they actually fall pretty close to a lot of my dearly-held beliefs, environmentalism aside. Yes, I also consider myself to be an environmentalist too. So I don't have to hold my nose when I vote. As far as I'm concerned, this is a win-win-win situation. Should some kind of miracle occur and the Greens actually win in my riding, then it will only be a win-win-lose sort of situation, if and only if my MP turned out to be a lying asshole (like *that's* not possible or something).

So if I'm pissing my vote away, good. Politicians *need* to be pissed on.
Posted by gromm on April 27, 2011 at 4:08 PM · Report this
Adam_west 111
@109 interesting, but notice how all your stats are put in the form that makes them sound the worst

Population attributable risk of 7% makes it sound much larger then if you look at the chance per act with an HIV + person, because the number how contract HIV is a relatively small amount compared the the number who have oral sex with an HIV+ person.

Next, using the chance of contraction of being topped by someone of unknown HIV status, is to make it appear much smaller, as the % of HIV + people in the population is small. Thereby you make the oral contraction seem higher when you compare it to it.

Essentially, the statistics you pulled seem to be put in an alarmist fahion, but I agree that it is still greater than zero...
Posted by Adam_west on April 27, 2011 at 4:59 PM · Report this
112
@6: "would make him wear TWO condoms"

are you a 15 y/o virgin?

please tell me you are and aren't having risky sex without knowing how risky your sex life is, because you're a horribly dangerous moron.
Posted by can't believe you think you know what you're doing on April 27, 2011 at 5:11 PM · Report this
113
Re SFMi,

My reading is both of them have inner voices saying- have a child with the other. On the outside they are logically against it. (The no voices won out.)

Withdrawal is a powerful contraceptive. But either party can thwart it. (Yes, I think a cunt can milk an unsuspecting cock.) That's why it's ineffective.
Posted by Hunter78 on April 27, 2011 at 5:41 PM · Report this
114 Comment Pulled (Spam) Comment Policy
115
Thanks Dan for encouraging your readers to oppose Stephen Harper. You have a fantastically loyal readership in Canada. Up here in Canada we often feel too safe concerning our reproductive rights, and look smugly at the US. Your attention is appreciated.
Posted by Northern Reader on April 27, 2011 at 6:07 PM · Report this
116
thedreadfulbirds,

"I usually know when I'm ovulating."

[Warning: this is a digression from the proper themes of this column, Savage Letters and Canadian politics.]

A few weeks ago at the afterwork bar, after ogling our always sultry Barmaid, I called out to a buddy some distance away, "Hey, look! B is ovulating." (With some reason, I thought.)

This brought the house down, mostly with laughter. A female friend and regular was incensed. How dare I?

Do others observe women ovulating?

Is this beyond the pale of discussion? Even in a bar where sexual innuendo is the norm?

This incident also suggested that almost half of men don't know the difference between ovulating and menstruating.
Posted by Hunter78 on April 27, 2011 at 6:28 PM · Report this
117
@111

How are the data mentioned in @109 presented in an alarmist fashion? Swallowing come is not a risk-free activity. Yes, @109 states that the population attributable risk is 7%.....that's what the data show. @109 also states that the risk of contracting HIV from each single episode of oral sex with ejaculation is 0.04%.... how is that alarmist? How is considering all the data together an alarmist argument?
Posted by chicago girl on April 27, 2011 at 6:41 PM · Report this
118
@116

How can you tell? I can tell when *I'm* ovulating; it causes pain and a change in vaginal secretions, but how on earth can you tell by *looking* at someone? However, if you really can tell, it's more polite not to mention it. On the one hand because you might very well be wrong (and since women often have no idea when they ovulate), and on the other because that's kind of personal and a lot of women might prefer to keep that to themselves.
Posted by chicago girl on April 27, 2011 at 6:52 PM · Report this
mydriasis 119
@100

You read my whole post, right? I said I don't like to have sex during that time...
Posted by mydriasis on April 27, 2011 at 7:20 PM · Report this
mydriasis 120
@116

I'm with 118, I'd say it's akin to saying "hey look, B is on her period!" Even if you were making some sort of educated guess (she looks bloated!) It's kind of offensive.

Besides, what were you basing it on? She looked extra pretty? She was wearing less clothing?

It's called "hidden" ovulation for a reason, most of the signs are subtle and anyone who's not actively fucking the girl is really just taking a shot in the dark.

Unless you know something I don't...
Posted by mydriasis on April 27, 2011 at 7:25 PM · Report this
Canuck 121
@116 I'll disagree here, I don't think it's akin to saying someone is on her period, I think it's funny...but same questions as the others, given that we aren't chimps who present rather obvious signs of ovulation, how would you know?

And as for jokes, my husband regularly warns people off doing certain things or dressing certain ways, as it will be sure to cause me to ovulate...we both joke about it. But then, we're Canadian.
Posted by Canuck on April 27, 2011 at 7:48 PM · Report this
Backyard Bombardier 122
@118: He doesn't know something you don't know. He's just a douche.
Posted by Backyard Bombardier on April 27, 2011 at 7:49 PM · Report this
123
Dan's advice to HIV is absolutely perfect. As an HIV+ gay man with a zero viral load, I wish everyone would read it.
Posted by Gay Movie Freak on April 27, 2011 at 8:27 PM · Report this
124
It's not necessarily irresponsible to vote Green. It depends on your riding. For instance, those in the Saanich should definitely vote Green because Elizabeth May has a good chance of defeating her Conservative opponent there. Also, there are some people in ridings where the winner is pretty much decided--many Alberta ridings are staunchly Conservative, so there's nothing much you can do to oust them. If you live in a Conservative-safe riding, you can consider voting Green just to up their national popular vote.

Anyway, I wanted to comment on the withdrawal method. As effective as it may be, I don't understand why people keep talking about how "convenient" it is. Doesn't it bother guys not to get to finish in the hole, as it were?
Posted by MichelleZB on April 27, 2011 at 9:18 PM · Report this
125
@85 - it is possible to ovulate more than once in a cycle. I know I do sometimes. Fun, right?
Posted by gnot on April 27, 2011 at 10:24 PM · Report this
Unregistered User 126
Given the number of people that comment on these articles, do we have a statistical sample of withdrawal method stories yet?

Are ~10% getting pregnant per year, (within simple counting errors)?

SOMEBODY COUNT!
Posted by Unregistered User on April 27, 2011 at 11:11 PM · Report this
mommyducky 127
@13, yes we do!

Over three years and one child as a result of him intentionally cumming inside me when we decided to have a child (yes, it only took one time and we got pregnant - he has a high sperm count and I'm quite fertile). So I know the pull out method works, our daughter is two and a half years old and we've never used any other form of birth control.
Posted by mommyducky on April 28, 2011 at 12:42 AM · Report this
mommyducky 128
@20/21 listedasmygun

Thank you for those comments. It wasn't a surprise to me either as I've been using the pull-out method for years. And I agree with your second comment completely as well.
Posted by mommyducky on April 28, 2011 at 12:48 AM · Report this
129
@125 - women sometimes release 2 eggs in the same 24 hour period; and women sometimes have short (15-day) cycles. But ovulating once and then again a few days later? That's exceedingly rare.
Posted by EricaP on April 28, 2011 at 12:56 AM · Report this
Noadi 130
@48 WTF? Just a hint to you: the sensation of needle play and enjoying that and the desire to get high are two vastly different things. I LOVE needle play, I've had dozens of needles in my back (and elsewhere) and have no desire to EVER use intravenous drugs. People get high for a lot of reasons but I really doubt anyone has started using drugs because they like needle sticks.

As for safety: there are risks to needle play but everyone I know who does it is extremely careful, using brand new sterile needles that aren't opened until right before insertion, gloves, cleaning the skin thoroughly before and after play, immediately placing used needles in a sharps container, etc. However I would put the risk of properly done needle play as very low, not as safe as a blood draw in a hospital but few things are. Now if you aren't fluid bonded to your partner you probably don't want to play with the blood the way me and my partner do but that's private play, at parties we are extra careful about safety.
Posted by Noadi http://noadi.net on April 28, 2011 at 3:33 AM · Report this
131
There is one case where I would have sexual contact with someone that is HIV+, and that is if I'm committed to spending the rest of my life with them.

I don't think it's very responsible to tell someone that openly admits that they have sex with random people for money that it's "safe" to introduce HIV into the equation.

It's not, it kills, and it will continue to kill as long as people that have HIV are sexually active with those that do not have HIV.
Posted by name on April 28, 2011 at 7:52 AM · Report this
132
@104, You sound *very* naive about Harper. The guy doesn't care if the country goes to hell, he just wants power -- and will do anything to get it. Check this out.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorial…
Posted by Amanda on April 28, 2011 at 9:09 AM · Report this
Backyard Bombardier 133
@124: "Doesn't it bother guys not to get to finish in the hole, as it were?"

As long as I get to finish, I'm happy. Sure, it's nice to come inside, but it can be just as good outside. And there is something very hot about pulling out and coming all over her stomach, or ass, or tits.*

*(Cue someone who is going to post that this increases the risk of accidental pregnancy, as sperm can survive on the skin and make their way into the vagina and to use withdrawal correctly I need to immediately stick my dick in a Zip-Loc bag and make sure no little wigglers get away. Absolutely true. Which is why I only ever used withdrawal in situations where I was comfortable with an elevated risk of accidental pregnancy. And let me say again... hot.)

(And, I agree re voting Green in cases where the Tory is a runaway favourite to help raise their popular vote and profile. I've done it myself a few times.)
Posted by Backyard Bombardier on April 28, 2011 at 9:48 AM · Report this
134
"Doesn't it bother guys not to get to finish in the hole, as it were?"

Hell, I'm a girl and it'd bother me - feeling those little spasms inside me is one of my favourite parts of sex.

(We always use condoms, btw. Always.)

And others have said this in response to comment #6, but I feel the need to repeat it, louder, to make absolutely sure the message gets through:

***DO NOT WEAR MORE THAN ONE CONDOM AT A TIME BECAUSE THERE IS A MUCH HIGHER LIKELIHOOD OF BREAKAGE***. The layers will rub together and weaken each other. They taught us this in sex ed when I was twelve years old. I wonder how old #6 is?
Posted by perversecowgirl on April 28, 2011 at 10:35 AM · Report this
muzyqman 135
I applaud the letter from and your response to Heteroflexible. I love how he called himself a "sugar baby." Personally, I prefer the term "sugar chicken"!
Posted by muzyqman on April 28, 2011 at 10:49 AM · Report this
secretagent 136
@102 - because we assume that others are adults and responsible for their own choices.

I have tried damn near every birth control method under the sun - the patch, the ring, the pill, the shot, the copper iud, the hormonal iud, condoms and withdrawal. I can't use the copper (allergies) or the hormonal (egg donor) iud, and all the other hormonal methods make me really moody, fat, tired, hungry and kill my libido. My partner is untrained in using condoms and they make him limp. They make me dry. And, we just plain don't like them. So, after a bunch of research and discussion with my partner, I chose withdrawal. These combination of factors make that choice make sense to me:
There is no sperm in precum (see citation)
My cycle is very regular
The number of days it's even possible to get pregnant are few
The number of women my age who get pregnant at all even when trying is not high
At least half of pregnancies end in miscarriage
My partner is incredibly skilled at withdrawal
My partner is incredibly honest
I keep the morning after pill in my nightstand in case of screwups

So, if after all this, I still get pregnant - it's the Messiah and I'll have to keep it anyway.

No sperm present in precum: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12286…

I would absolutely not recommend it for anyone who is not in a monogamous LTR, whose partner isn't awesome, who can use other methods just fine, and who absolutely would not be prepared to choose abortion or raise a child.
Posted by secretagent on April 28, 2011 at 2:54 PM · Report this
secretagent 137
Oh yeah, and you should both pee and wash if you're going for round 2 or 3 or 412.
Posted by secretagent on April 28, 2011 at 2:55 PM · Report this
138 Comment Pulled (Spam) Comment Policy
139
Here's the thing SFMi: Those statistics aren't going to mean a goddamned thing when you're faced with an unwanted pregnancy. When your partner misses her period and you realize you can't get away with this lame, almost cruelly fatalistic 'Well we don't want a kid, really, but aren't stopping it' approach forever – and maybe you freak and realize you don't want to be a dad, or she freaks and realizes this is not the right time for her, and suddenly abortion and your relationship are on the line – you aren't going to come back to this page and tell her 'But there's no way you're pregnant! Look how low the statistics are, according to Dan Savage!'

In short, you both need to grow up and take some responsibility. Either you are trying for a kid (including taking supplements, avoiding narcotics, saving money, investigating daycare and housing options, etc.) or you're not.
Posted by Shazaam on April 28, 2011 at 6:50 PM · Report this
140 Comment Pulled (Spam) Comment Policy
141
Hey Dan, thanks for commenting on Canadian politics. I didn't know that being an American columnist,provided you with such insight to our political situation.

We'll vote out Harper when you silence Sarah Palin, quit your love affair with the Gitmo landlord Obama, and stop your media from speaking about Reagan like he was a saint. Deal?...
Posted by rocketman2u on April 28, 2011 at 7:18 PM · Report this
Backyard Bombardier 142
@141: Oh fuck off. Dan's right. Harper is a douchebag and needs to be voted out of office. I reserve the right to comment on American politics, and Dan (and anyone else) is welcome to comment on Canadian politics.
Posted by Backyard Bombardier on April 28, 2011 at 7:56 PM · Report this
143
right on 136. and to hell with all the dogmatic assholes wagging their fingers at anyone who doesn't adhere to the pc white noise. there's no "one" solution for everyone.
Posted by ellarosa on April 28, 2011 at 8:51 PM · Report this
144
To small gov.: could you email me please? roadtrip614@yahoo.com
Posted by dog on April 28, 2011 at 9:18 PM · Report this
145
@48 truly wth?
That to me would signal someone who may have abused – or may want to abuse - needles in connection with drugs, and therefore has serious risks of being or becoming HIV+.

.....or anyone with a nice, balanced, sharp, well-made kitchen knife is at risk for becoming a mugger.

bdsm needle play is about.....bdsm needle play, otherwise known as risk-aware consensual kink sharps play. the needles are a means to an end, not the, er, point. not everyone who plays with a wartenberg wheel is a medical professional, either.
Posted by erys on April 28, 2011 at 9:48 PM · Report this
146
I don't blame sex educators for not advocating withdrawal as an effective method of birth control. I'm happily married and I'd never depend on withdrawal unless, like previous posters have said, I was "willing to accept" getting pregnant, which doesn't seem like the greatest way to approach pregnancy.

There's only a brief, magical window each month when women can get pregnant, but all 6 billion people in the world are products of couples hitting that window, most of them unexpectedly.
Posted by Amanda on April 29, 2011 at 12:26 AM · Report this
gregok 147
@109 thankyou for posting the links and revealing your sources.

The article is indeed very revealing. As is the selective conclusion you decide to take from it.

Note for starters that the study lost a significant number of participants without gaining data from them. the consequences of that might skew the results. Also most of the analysis between potential infection points has been established through models and by comparing model results with the actual results. Thiss is highly speculative.

Most pertinent to the LWs concern addressed by Dan, a person who knows they have HIV is more likely to be on HART treatments and therefore less likely to infect than a person who belkieves they are negative or does not disclose, but who is positive and highly infectious. This study does not cover that distinction even in the cases of the (quite low) number of seroconverters with a known HIV pos partner.

But it does note there were no seroconversions among men in monogamour relationship with HIV pos partners. That might be a hint. But entirely my speculation.

This is a very interesting study but please avoid abusing its conclusions in an alarmist way.
Posted by gregok on April 29, 2011 at 12:51 AM · Report this
gregok 148
@109 (Further to above 147)

Refer in particular to the qualifications laid out in the Discussions section of the paper about the failure/inability to make distinction in risk regarding the infectiousness of partners.
Posted by gregok on April 29, 2011 at 12:55 AM · Report this
149
chicago girl (and others),

"How can you tell?"

Note: There have been studies (no, I'm not looking them up) where pictures were taken of women at various points in their cycles. People were then asked to judge. Both men and women rated ovulating subjects more attractive than the same subjects at other times.

B is hot, but I'm not emotionally entangled, so I'm an attentive but reasonably unbiased observer. That particular evening her face seemed softer than normal. She appeared to bask more in the attention of guys. She posed herself differently. I was trying to figure out what was going on when I remembered the ovulation thing. Bingo.

Invasive? Yes. It's a bar. Insulting? On the contrary, imo. Of course, I could have been wrong, but it was good fun.
Posted by Hunter78 on April 29, 2011 at 2:45 AM · Report this
150
Sadly, just being the "green" party is giving the Green party countless votes from a few politically uninvolved groups:
1) the "Hey, we should save the environment!" people, who don't bother looking at the NDP's pro-environment vision that's been there for decades

and

2) the "Hey, I like weed. Weed is green. I'm voting for weed... maaaan." There are more of these than you think. Hopefully these idiots read a little further on the ballot and realize they can actually vote for the Marijuana party and make their voice (or cough) heard.

So that's that.

Re: strategic voting. I think it's bullshit. If we just keep voting strategically for the rest of our lives, it'll just be a Lib vs. Con battle - forever. The surge in the NDP has been caused be a lot of people refusing to just vote for the lesser evil, anad vote for what they believe in. Even if the results in a Con majority for the next few years, once we get through that hell, we'll have realized the true terror of the Conservatives (I hyperbolize, slightly). So vote for what you believe in. Strategic voting is bullshit.
Posted by Robi on April 29, 2011 at 8:42 AM · Report this
mydriasis 151
@Hunter

I'm perfectly aware of that study, but just because a woman is looking fine on a particular night is not a legit sign she's ovulating. (Hint: there isn't one - from afar anyway) If you want to make a guess, that's fine, but expressing it is pretty creepy/innapropriate. Many of the (female) posters have tried expressing this to you - as well as your friends. It seems you're uninterested in any other opinions so I'm going to go ahead you were positing that as an amirite?? And assuming we were all going to agree that your friends are prudes.

You might think it's flattering, but we're trying to explain that commenting on the inner personal workings of a woman's reproductive system (no matter in how positive a way) is not really kosher. We don't like it. But eh, you've made up your mind.

For the record, I work at a bar and I've seen/been on the recieving end of a LOT of invasive behaviour and have a pretty high tolerance. But just because I accept it as an occupational hazard doesn't mean that I think it's okay. And no I wouldn't take "excuse me miss, you look extra attractive today, are you ovulating?" as a compliment.
Posted by mydriasis on April 29, 2011 at 9:13 AM · Report this
152
First of all, to those looking for information on birth control, sexual health, etc, I strongly recommend scarleteen.com.

Next, I know this is a long way back, but I would like to second EricaP @74. I have dysmenorrhea, and I have to take the Pill, or I experience simply awful cramps and a cycle that is unfair in that I go a week on my period, two weeks off, and then begin my period again.

However, my libido is just hunky dory on the pill. I know it isn't true for everyone, but still.

Since I'm allergic to both latex and glycerin and generally am sensitive to chemicals, condoms are basically off the table. Our backup method is withdrawal; this is despite me being absolutely perfect about taking my pill. In three years on the pill, I can count on one hand the number of times I've been more than half an hour off and list where and when it happened.

But I still do all of this with the understanding that nothing is foolproof. If I were to get pregnant, I know what I'd do, and I've discussed it with my boyfriend.
Posted by Namae nante iranai! on April 29, 2011 at 10:06 AM · Report this
153
No wonder there seem to be so few bisexuals - they keep inventing stupid words like "hetero-flexible" to describe themselves.
Posted by Chase on April 29, 2011 at 10:51 AM · Report this
154
Hey 142, " Backyard Bombardier", go fuck yourself.

Sorry my French-Canadian brother. But this is the problem with the US. They want to crap in our backyard, but make no attempt to clean up their own.
Posted by rocketman2u on April 29, 2011 at 6:11 PM · Report this
155 Comment Pulled (Spam) Comment Policy
156
@149

I don't think it's insulting to publicly speculate that a woman might be ovulating, just a bit rude. If someone talked about me that way, I wouldn't be insulted, just annoyed.
Posted by chicago girl on April 30, 2011 at 1:15 AM · Report this
Backyard Bombardier 157
@154: Yes, it's entirely Dan's responsibility to make sure no one in the US is doing anything objectionable before he comments on politics outside the US.

Dick.
Posted by Backyard Bombardier on April 30, 2011 at 11:07 AM · Report this
158
For those of you who remember PATH's woes (no sex with wife for 2 years, since he stopped initiating) from the "I Want My MTV" Savage Love two weeks ago-- he just posted an update in that thread.

Posted by EricaP on April 30, 2011 at 3:52 PM · Report this
159
Hey 157, go tote the " Manifest Destiny" doctrine..

As your wizened, learned Buddha " Dr.Phil" has said to you: " How is that working' for ya?"..

God bless our socialist country...

Douche-bag...
Posted by rocketman2u on April 30, 2011 at 5:03 PM · Report this
160
@37

The Language Police would like to inform you that 'primary' (as in 'primary form of birth control') does not mean 'only', it means 'main'.

As you were.
Posted by Tee-hee on April 30, 2011 at 9:41 PM · Report this
Canuck 161
Geez, rocketman2u, chill out! Backyard Bombardier and I have spent our fair share of time defending the right of people from other countries-like Canada- to comment on US politics on these threads, so it follows that informed, caring people from the States should be free to comment on Canadian politics. (We're the interloper Canadians on this US blog...remember??)
Posted by Canuck on April 30, 2011 at 11:03 PM · Report this
162
If SFMi is really that worried there are over-the-counter fertility tests for men and women now. They're available in the UK from the chemists, and probably by mail order from the internet too. Cheaper (though a bit less thorough and accurate) than going to a fertility clinic to find out.

It is not impossible that SFMi or his partner has compromised fertility despite all these stats about withdrawal working - the younger you know, the more time you have to decide if and what you might want to do about it. Age is by far from being the only way that people lose their fertility.

Having said that I have friends who couldn't get pregnant together and they discovered after IUI worked first time that the reason was they were never both at home when she was ovulating. So you never know.
Posted by krissf on May 1, 2011 at 3:36 AM · Report this
163
I can't believe this, but I'm sorta kinda siding with Slidebone, here.

Vilification of the Conservatives does us no good. There are plenty of reasons for a thinking person not to vote Conservative based on their policies (and on their contempt for Parliament); it's not necessary to paint Harper as some right-of-Bush monster. Conservatives are not evil; they are people with a different vision for this country than mine and I will never vote for them, but their Canada would still be a reasonably livable place.

The incumbent Tory MP in my riding is an incompetent blowhard, and I'd love to see him out of office (won't happen, I'm in rural Alberta). The incumbent Tory MLA, on the other hand, is a competent and reasonable person with a moderate viewpoint. I'll still never vote for him because I disagree with too many policies of his party, but I'm not going to go into mourning when he gets reelected in the next provincial election.

I'd like to pick up on a personal pet peeve of mine - let's not get into the habit of becoming too leader-centered in discussions on Canadian politics. The only people in this country voting for *Harper* will be the voters of Calgary Southwest. We're not Americans, we do not vote for our Prime Minister.
Posted by agony on May 1, 2011 at 8:05 AM · Report this
164
@162- "they discovered after IUI worked first time that the reason was they were never both at home when she was ovulating.

This is why prospective parents should be understand the woman's fertility window! Anyone who is having any trouble getting pregnant should try charting for a few months. Compared to raising a newborn, it's no trouble/expense at all, and it tells you unambiguously the few days each month when you have to screw if you want to make a baby.

Screwing outside the window = fun, but no baby. Screwing inside the window, and not getting pregnant within a couple of months = evidence that you may need to consult a doctor about fertility issues.
Posted by EricaP on May 1, 2011 at 9:44 AM · Report this
Canuck 165
agony, I think the thing that worries me so much about Harper is that he has tried, unsuccessfully, to put same-sex marriage up for debate again, he's anti abortion, and although he says it won't be revisited, read this:
http://drdawgsblawg.ca/2011/04/abortion-…
He tries to come across as innocuous, but I think he'd be a very different, very dangerous man with a majority government. If a little vilification makes people think twice, or look deeper into his background, I think that's okay, but that's just my take on it...
Posted by Canuck on May 1, 2011 at 10:21 AM · Report this
starshine_kitten 166
www.shitharperdid.com is an awesome website. And don't worry Dan, it looks like tomorrow will be an historic election, possibly with a Conservative minority and the very left-leaning, woman friendly, anti-war, pro-gay NDP party as the official opposition. Pure awesomeness.
Posted by starshine_kitten on May 1, 2011 at 10:26 AM · Report this
167
For me, I seriously dislike the negative, personality based direction our elections are taking, and don't want to buy into any aspect of it. If he cannot be defeated on the issues, maybe we deserve him.

I also think the vilification does our side harm, because the tendency would not be to make people look a little deeper, but instead, recoil in disgust at the negativity. It really is not our way. Overstating the case, only telling one side of the story - most Canadians do not like that style.

I think a Harper majority would be very bad for this country. However, I think US style polarization of politics would be worse.

The hope for this country is consensus building, and one of my biggest issues with the Conservatives is the way they threw away the chance these last two minority governments gave them, to work together with the other parties to enact legislation that everyone can swallow. Mr Harper, personally, has shown very clearly that he cannot play nicely with others, and that alone is enough reason to not vote for his party.
Posted by agony on May 1, 2011 at 11:32 AM · Report this
168
starshine_kitten, dream on. I'd love to see it, but it ain't gonna happen.
Posted by agony on May 1, 2011 at 11:34 AM · Report this
xjuan 169
"Withdrawal is a much more effective birth control method than most sex advisers are comfortable acknowledging," but it is a bummer. Part of the joy is comming into that squishy delicious membrane called vagina. Granted, not all the time, but whenever desirable and/or possible.

However, Dan's advice should not, by any means, be taken as permission to withdraw at all times. Ask the thounsands of unwilling pregnant women who happen to have gootten that way by a bad withdrawers. Especially teen single mothers. My advice: use any method other that withdrawal --unless you don't fear getting pregnant-- and be conscious of the consequences of your acts.
Posted by xjuan on May 1, 2011 at 10:21 PM · Report this
170
@ 6 - "I guess you could also switch holes at the last minute just like they do in the movies."

___________
No wonder your comments are so immature and repulsive!
Hey, there, TROLL, you may wish to remember that the PERSON you are fucking is a human being and NOT a "hole."
Newsflash: women are NOT "holes" - no matter how much your teenage boy mind likes to think of them that way.
Grow up, and do it before you go and have sex with someone else. Oh, wait. Maybe that is why you "watch movies."
Here's another newsflash for YOU: those movies aren't REAL.
You are a creep and I don't give a damn who thinks otherwise.
Go and learn some self-respect and try to refrain from using other human beings as "holes."
It is men like you who make me - and alot of women - think twice about fucking ANY of you at all. And, sweetheart, I'm not alone in that assessment.
The next time you sit around all bitter and moaning about all the "bitches" in the world (and, yep, we can all tell that is EXACTLY what you get up to when you don't have to be "polite") look in the mirror and ask yourself this: "maybe if I didn't think of women as "holes" then maybe I'd be able to engage in the act of sex with them?" Or, how about the next time one of "your kind" meaning, creepy-self-entitled-immature-but-the-world-owes-me-something-men" joins the peanut gallery of sitting around degrading women, YOU actually speak up and say something to set them straight.
Enough with the "games," the lies, the bullshit that men like you perpetrate simply because you have LOW SELF-ESTEEM and think that by bringing women (in general, mind) down to your level, you've "achieved" something.
By the way, honey, "love" isn't found in your dick.
Also, sweat doesn't make the human vagina wet, by the way. That is down to lubrication.
Here's a biology lesson for YOU: sweat contains SALT which dries out membranous tissues, unlike vaginal lubrication.
Once again, that "hole" you fuck is a human and not a rubber doll. You can't just pour water - or "sweat" over the hole and then get your jollies.
It is astonishing that men like you make it out of grade school - much less to adulthood (and, THAT is a big assumption, indeed, because I'm sure that you are a teenage boy and just don't know any better).
It will be a fine day when "movies" go back to being about people fucking and not about male neuroses and their ignorance of the female body.
I feel sorry for you children, nowadays.
Yes, even if you're in your 40s (doubtful) you are still a child as far as I'm concerned.
Now, go troll somewhere else - or better yet, read a biology book or go learn something that contributes to humanity.
Yep, I know I gave you an audience and cheap thrill for your trolling but maybe someone else will read this and see a different perspective to your marlacky that you insist on posting.

More...
Posted by Frederica Bimble on May 2, 2011 at 4:00 AM · Report this
171
What do you call people who use the "rhythm method" as a form of birth control? Answer: parents.
Posted by Frederica Bimble on May 2, 2011 at 4:22 AM · Report this
172
@150: If you properly understood what strategic voting is about, you'd know that it isn't about a "Lib vs. Con battle - forever". It's about a "any candidate but Conservative" battle. Why don't you go to www.democracyproject.ca, look up your riding to see how the votes fell during the last election, and see which Liberal/NDP/Green/non-Conservative candidate stands the best chance of beating a Harper crony. Then vote for that person, and hope that every other Canadian who can't stand Harper will do the same.

As long as our votes are all split on the left, we're never going to get rid of Harper, so let's get smart about our voting strategy.
Posted by RelaxBuddy on May 2, 2011 at 8:07 AM · Report this
173
Whether or not Harper stays in office, this will stay in my vocabulary:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.ph…
Posted by Typo on May 2, 2011 at 8:46 AM · Report this
174
Whether or not Harper stays in office, this will stay in my vocabulary:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.ph…
Posted by Typo on May 2, 2011 at 8:48 AM · Report this
175
Well, starshine_kitten, I guess I need to at least partially eat my words. Never thought I'd see an NDP opposition - hope they don't squander their opportunity. Very happy tonight, even with the Tory majority.
Posted by agony on May 2, 2011 at 8:19 PM · Report this
shw3nn 176
@149 Luckily, there is this handy comic that will clarify why you are an idiot without me having to explain how science works to you knowing full well you won't read what I wrote or ever care how science works unless you can use the information to justify acting like a cunt in a bar.
Posted by shw3nn on May 3, 2011 at 8:47 AM · Report this
177
On the FAM issue, my late partner and I used it for over 20 years, only using condoms on potentially fertile days (roughly 4-5 days a mth, to allow for the the life of both the egg and the sperm). I kept basal temp. charts for several years to track my ovulations, but eventually gave it up, since I could tell from other signs when I was fertile.

Studies on "FAM" that don't take into account whether or not couples used the "strict" method (no unprotected sex pre-ovulation...we didn't, ftr), or always APPLIED the method properly are worthless.

23% chance of pregnancy, on average, over a year? Not bloodly likely IF the couple was actually, consistently, practicing FAM, either with abstinence or protected sex during fertile times.

We produced 2 children in 23 years, neither one of which was a result of a failure of the method (one was a broken condom baby and the other a "WTF/let's do it" baby, conceived through condom-less sex with full knowledge that conception was likely:)

Never tried withdrawal (or wanted to).
Posted by AnastasiaBeaverhousen on May 3, 2011 at 9:33 AM · Report this
178
"What do you call people who use the "rhythm method" as a form of birth control? Answer: parents."

True. Going by a calendar instead of the woman's body is a fool's game. I've always been regular as clockwork, with 28 day cycles, but even so, I spent years charting my temps and learning to recognize the other signs (soft, opening cervix, fertile mucus, etc..) of approaching or actual fertility (and since sperm can live inside the woman's body for up to 3 days, it is important to PREDICT ovulation, not just CONFIRM it after the fact; perfectly possible to get pregnant from sex a few days BEFORE the egg is released).

One amazing device now available is a small magnifying lens which you can smear with vaginal secretions or saliva and hold it up to the light...if fertility is approaching, fern-like patterns are formed on the lens. Otherwise, just a smudge. And these changes occur far enough in advance of ovulation, as the hormones shift, to effectively prevent pregnancy if observed. Such knowledge and devices are a boon to those in areas where access to other birth control is limited or absent, as well as being pretty cool :)

Posted by AnastasiaBeaverhousen on May 3, 2011 at 10:01 AM · Report this
179
Well. Dan obviously isn't much of an international political operative, since his one paragraph repping shitharperdid failed to swing the election.

At least the ignorance, irrationality, arrogance, and political naivete (or intellectual dishonesty) displayed by a few of the pro-Harper/anti-left(ish)/anti-American Canadian posters who felt justified in telling a private individual (who happens to be a citizen of another country) writing on a privately owned website that he should or shouldn't comment on a topic (even to state a rather broad political opinion and link to another (apparently Canadian-operated!) website was pretty entertaining. They actually sound a lot like teabaggers.

Would like to know where slidebone got his info about Obama supposedly not knowing that Canada is the US's largest trade partner. I can't find any bit of news on the subject that sounds remotely like that.
Posted by catfishmeow on May 4, 2011 at 5:22 PM · Report this
180

I used withdrawal for six years with six partners. No pregnancies, no other forms of BC (except for Plan B on a few occasions when they came inside me). The ONE TIME I said, "Fuck it, I'm on my period, just go ahead"-- pregnant.

I think withdrawal works, but I don't really want to do the expense or ordeal again so I just do the ring now. Might combine ring + withdrawal just to be on the safe side.

Posted by Crackersnap on May 5, 2011 at 4:30 PM · Report this
181
Can I just say, even if history says that there's less than 5 recorded instances of HIV transmission through blowjobs doesn't that still allow for the possibility that this sugarbaby could still contract the disease from his partner? With those kinds of odds I wouldn't play, I'm trying to stay HIV negative so if I know for a fact my partner is positive then goodbye bj's...
Posted by Rauchy Rigo on May 10, 2011 at 2:19 PM · Report this
182
Looks like the Conservatives won. Nice try. America is next.
Posted by Equalist on May 15, 2011 at 7:24 AM · Report this
183
my husband and i have been together since high school so 8yrs and 2 of those are married yrs... we used the pull out method most of the time and i never got pregnant.. when we were ready to actively try and conceive it happened and i now have a wonderful 9mo old son... i think anyone that doesnt have safe sex needs to be prepared for the "what if" though not just with pregnancy but STIs/STDs
Posted by lauren22487 on May 30, 2012 at 12:12 PM · Report this

Add a comment