For those of you that haven't a clue...
 

This is not meant to be funny or mean, but guys really aren't thinking after they've unloaded their spunk...

Then their stuff shrinks and the "bag" can conveniently become "oversized"--so to speak...

So they usually after-thrust, lose the condom or if it's old, it tears, and either the semen either falls out it just enough to impregnant a woman, depending on sperm counts and ability to swim and reach, etc. or he ejaculates more that makes it worse...

A woman, on the otherhand, who is not actively taking the norestradiol pills/patches, as well as other contraceptive devices, can move her cervix right into the mix--like it pumps down, etc. right into a "well" allegely filled with semen so that these guys can be thrusted past the uterus, into the fallopian tubes to get to the oocyte...

Most oocytes that are ready to be fertilized are just coming out of the ovary and have either 1-2 outer layers removed from the "follicular stimulation". Depending on hormonal conditions, pH, and other factors--i.e. uterine nutrients, etc. the physical pregnancy occurs when there is implantation and hormonal factors are sent to the pituitary and the hippocampus. As some are aware, this occurs within 24-48 hours after "conception".

These anecdontal stories of a woman getting pregnant in a swimming pool without actual intercourse--I'm sorry, but I don't buy it. Moreover, that's why IVF cost so much because the way I just described it, doesn't happen 100% of the time.

And I got this from Cecil's Textbook of Medicine, the edition before the latest one...

It takes two to conceive a child. But it falls to the woman to suffer the discomfort of pregnancy and the trauma of childbirth. So it's really the woman's choice whether to proceed with the pregnancy or not.

The fact is that, whenever you have unprotected sex, you run the risk of pregnancy. Of course, whenever you have protected sex, you also run the risk of pregnancy, although that risk is much smaller. But if you're a man and you're unwilling to do something as simple as putting on a condom, you need to be willing to deal with the consequences - i.e., your baby. And, for that matter, if you're a woman and you don't insist on a condom or other birth control method, you have to accept that you may end up pregnant. Both parties must accept the responsibility for birth control, or accept responsibility for the resulting baby.

AKA_Monet I get what you're saying.

I probably should have been a little bit more broad in my statement. aephi alum worded it a lot better.

There are such things as backup methods of contraceptives and there are also many different kinds, so if a guy is really hell-bent on not producing a child, he should work w/ the female and make sure all their bases are covered.

Furthermore, they need to both understand that nothing is 100% and the possibility is always there that a baby might result.

Yeah it's such a trauma. It's like getting shot or watching your family die. Why don't we just eliminate pregnancy completely?

-Rudey

Let me get this straight, it's his responsibility to make sure she is responsible? It's also his responsibility to make sure she doesn't intentionally get pregnant. But deciding to keep the baby is only the mother's responsibility.

-Rudey
--Wonderfully imbalanced equation

Sounds like a plan. You go work on that.

Do you buy your snappy remarks from the SNAPPY! store?

-Rudey

I did. Though I lost the baby naturally, I had already opted to have and raise the baby myself. The "father" would not have provided a penny of support. I would LOVE to have had the option of not allowing him to see the child if he didn't pay child support.

ABCNews Tonight showed an interview with Mr. Dubay and his baby's mama. She called herself "Laura" but didn't want her last name used on tv. That's okay because she allowed them to show her face on the broadcast. She claimed he's not "emotionally mature". She just turned 20 and he's 25. Neither appeared too bright.

It didn't look like she was hurting for cash since the baby's room was all decked out. You have to feel sorry for her parents who are most likely going to have to help raise the child. The end result he sounded whiny and admitted that he's paying child support.

No, it does. There is no doctor in the state of Oklahoma that is covered by my insurance that will do it. They all cite that if they do, because of my age and my childfree status, I'll change my mind later and they will be open to a lawsuit.

Check the livejournal childfree community, it's full of people in my situation. There are hundreds of people that can't get sterilization without first having kids they don't want.

I'm working on that in my garage actually. A baby farm in a sense. It's going to be the wave of the future and it will make me rich!

Hmm let’s think about this for a second.

1. Woman has baby against man’s wishes
2. Man declines financial responsibility
3. Woman applies for tax aide
4. Tax paying public helps pick up the slack

Fuck that shit…

Yes, but I think it gone to far in the woman's favor. The courts are actually ruling that even if you find out the child isn't yours you are obligated to pay child support.

C.T.F.U.

Got dayumit I need some sleep.

I kind of see both sides of the arguement.

Obviously if you're going to have sex BOTH parties need to be RESPONSIBLE and take the necessary precautions if they don't want to get pregnant.

That being said, we are in an age where the pendulum has swung more in favor of the women. Which is a good thing and a bad thing. It is definately good because women have been fighting for equal rights (and are still fighting to this day) on reproductive control of their bodies.

Now, I'm very pro-choice, but abortion isn't for everyone. Adoption isn't even for everyone. For some women their only choice is to have the child.

The bad is that we have been given quite a bit of power. I don't feel it is fair to "force" anyone to do anything they don't want to do. If the man is willing to sign away his rights to the child, he shouldn't be forced to pay child support. Enough said. Now, if he is actually actively involved in the upbringing of the child, yeah he should pay child support.

I've never had an unplanned pregnancy, so I can't imagine what women who do are thinking or feeling, but I can say that if I did get pregnant and the guy wanted nothing to do with his child, I can't say I'd want his money. Yeah, money puts food on the table and a roof over the head but money doesn't buy love. Plus, if I were to get pregnant, my family would give my child so much love he/she wouldn't need to worry or want. I'd rather not have anything to do with the man if he wants nothing to do with his child and that includes monitarily.

Now, I'm probably in a total minority with my latter thats and that's fine. There are going to be women who just want the money and don't even care that he is never there, I can't change that.

I just feel men should be given more options it shouldn't just be the cut and dry "you're going to pay child support, whether you see the child or not". It should be "you pay child support, you get to see your child" or "you sign away your rights to the child and you don't pay a cent".

Those are just my thoughts.

Agree with me, disagree with me, just respect my opinion.