Would you take a male pill?

[MoganFreeman]

While I don't condone unprotected promiscuity, it's interesting that you should mention natural selection in your tirade against promiscuity, being as, strictly speaking, those folk you pigeonholed so vehemently are far more successful than you, evolutionarily speaking.

And that's why you should never make assumptions... Because you look stupid.

I'm not against "promiscuity" at all. I'm against stupidity. In this day and age, if you go around fucking everyone that moves and don't have the 2 functioning brain cells to consider using a condom with that person you met 20 minutes ago... You're just asking for it... You're in the same bin as people who play russian roulette.

And, strictly evolutionarily speaking, a kid that has a child at the age of 15 is also more successful than someone who hasn't. Fortunately I like to elude myself and pretend most of us are smarter than your average brain damaged monkey... Even if most really aren't...

PS: It's Morgan Freeman [http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000151/], with an "r".

Forgive me, I meant "your tirade against unprotected promiscuity" and I wasn't coming out in favor of it; just making the point that by fucking hordes of women with no condoms you are going to be far more successful at passing your genes along to the next generation than someone with standards and a penchant for condoms.

But I certainly did not mean to imply that your well-intentioned crusade against the sort of stupidity that keeps our populations well stocked with the offspring of genetics undesirables was fueled by the passionate fires of envy at the sight of their near-constant, lust-fueled bacchanalian couplings.

Any assumptions about my meaning in that regard must have come from your end.

And, no, it is "Mogan Freeman". A nickname of mine from way back; pronounced like it is spelled.

And that's why you should never make assumptions... Because you look stupid.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

 

[Caliostro]

Forgive me, I meant "your tirade against unprotected promiscuity" and I wasn't coming out in favor of it; just making the point that by fucking hordes of women with no condoms you are going to be far more successful at passing your genes along to the next generation than someone with standards and a penchant for condoms.

But I certainly did not mean to imply that your well-intentioned crusade against the sort of stupidity that keeps our populations well stocked with the offspring of genetics undesirables was fueled by the passionate fires of envy at the sight of their near-constant, lust-fueled bacchanalian couplings.

Any assumptions about my meaning in that regard must have come from your end.

And, no, it is "Mogan Freeman". A nickname of mine from way back; pronounced like it is spelled.

And that's why you should never make assumptions... Because you look stupid.

I couldn't have said it better myself.

Nice try [http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/7/73/Trollface.png].

 

[cobra_ky]

No. I like my hormones the way they are. I have known lots of women who were on the pill and most of them hated it. It did all kinds of crazy shit to their bodies.

true, but i've also known a lot of women who were on their periods and they hated that too.

honestly i don't care that much. when was the last time my hormones did anything for me?

Forgive me, I meant "your tirade against unprotected promiscuity" and I wasn't coming out in favor of it; just making the point that by fucking hordes of women with no condoms you are going to be far more successful at passing your genes along to the next generation than someone with standards and a penchant for condoms.

But I certainly did not mean to imply that your well-intentioned crusade against the sort of stupidity that keeps our populations well stocked with the offspring of genetics undesirables was fueled by the passionate fires of envy at the sight of their near-constant, lust-fueled bacchanalian couplings.

you don't need to use that many syllables. all the big words make your post harder to read and come off as pretentious.

PS: It's Morgan Freeman [http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000151/], with an "r".

PPS: it's Cagliostro, with a "g".

 

[Caliostro]

PS: It's Morgan Freeman [http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000151/], with an "r".

PPS: it's Cagliostro, with a "g".

No it's not [http://generator-of-chaos.deviantart.com/art/Caliostro-55442491]. It's a character I've created long before I had ever heard of the movie.

 

[Cheshire Cat]

Personally I have no problem with it... Though I'd far rather just have the snip as I don't ever want children.

 

[FightThePower]

I'd take it, yeah. I hate kids and getting one at this age would fuck things up.

 

[Nmil-ek]

I fail to see why anyone would bother an injection for 2 months? Personaly if I was going to go that far I'd just get the snip.

 

[joshhewer]

as long as it wondered leave my sterile yes! still wouyld use a condom mind because the proper way to make you sterile is to have soon disease infested organ that make you look like a zombie gigilo!

 

[Emperor Inferno]

Well, there's a fundamental difference in how the reproductive systems work. In women, the overies release eggs that are already there, whereas in men, the testicles actively make sperm cells. I would be worried that "male birth control" might damage my ability to make sperm cells. If you want male contraception, vasectomies are safe, reversible, and effective. I don't know the numbers, but the way I hear it, pregnancies occuring where the male has had a vasectomy are very rare, more so than contracpetion failures.

So, vasectomy (safe + effective + reversible) = win.

 

[Destal]

If my wife didn't have merana, I would really consider this. I think if anything men would be more trustworthy.

 

[willer357]

on the other hand, if you decide that you really want a child, then you have to wait about two months, and that could help you decide if its worth it. It would force you to think

 

[NBSRDan]

If there are needles involved then fuck that. I'll stay with condoms. Otherwise, sure; if I'm gonna have kids, I want it to be intentional.

 

[cobra_ky]

Well, there's a fundamental difference in how the reproductive systems work. In women, the overies release eggs that are already there, whereas in men, the testicles actively make sperm cells. I would be worried that "male birth control" might damage my ability to make sperm cells. If you want male contraception, vasectomies are safe, reversible, and effective. I don't know the numbers, but the way I hear it, pregnancies occuring where the male has had a vasectomy are very rare, more so than contracpetion failures.

So, vasectomy (safe + effective + reversible) = win.

supposedly these injections are also safe, effective, and reversible. we'll see if that bears out in clinical testing, but if it does i'd vastly prefer that to an invasive surgical procedure.

 

[Emperor Inferno]

Well, there's a fundamental difference in how the reproductive systems work. In women, the overies release eggs that are already there, whereas in men, the testicles actively make sperm cells. I would be worried that "male birth control" might damage my ability to make sperm cells. If you want male contraception, vasectomies are safe, reversible, and effective. I don't know the numbers, but the way I hear it, pregnancies occuring where the male has had a vasectomy are very rare, more so than contracpetion failures.

So, vasectomy (safe + effective + reversible) = win.

1) supposedly these injections are also safe, effective, and reversible. we'll see if that bears out in clinical testing, 2) but if it does i'd vastly prefer that to an invasive surgical procedure.

1) Vasectomies are already proven to be all of these things, very much so. Also, there's no such thing as a chemical/medicine that has no risk to react with your body/other medications in a negative way. There's much less chance of a vasectomy having adverse effects because the only chemical involved is local anesthesia, they don't even knock you out.

2) Vasectomies are some of the least invasive surgery there is. They do little more than go past the skin.

 

[Good morning blues]

Holy shit would I ever be down for having both partners on birth control. No babies, please.

Well, there's a fundamental difference in how the reproductive systems work. In women, the overies release eggs that are already there, whereas in men, the testicles actively make sperm cells. I would be worried that "male birth control" might damage my ability to make sperm cells. If you want male contraception, vasectomies are safe, reversible, and effective. I don't know the numbers, but the way I hear it, pregnancies occuring where the male has had a vasectomy are very rare, more so than contracpetion failures.

So, vasectomy (safe + effective + reversible) = win.

1) supposedly these injections are also safe, effective, and reversible. we'll see if that bears out in clinical testing, 2) but if it does i'd vastly prefer that to an invasive surgical procedure.

1) Vasectomies are already proven to be all of these things, very much so. Also, there's no such thing as a chemical/medicine that has no risk to react with your body/other medications in a negative way. There's much less chance of a vasectomy having adverse effects because the only chemical involved is local anesthesia, they don't even knock you out.

2) Vasectomies are some of the least invasive surgery there is. They do little more than go past the skin.

Yeah that sounds like a great solution for everyo - oh right I'm 20 years old and therefore no respectable doctor would ever even consider giving me a vasectomy.

 

[KowBonez]

Even if the guy said he was on the pill, I'd still make him wear a condom.

 

[fenrizz]

I would take the pill, but not in needle form.
I hate needles!