PDA

View Full Version : Every child wanted


AZ Astrea
June 27th 03, 01:09 AM
If you conceive a way to assure every child is wanted and loved you're a
genius. If you think that the family court would allow you to disseminate
that knowledge you're crazy.

There are two things, I think, that would change the current sad state of
affairs to something more equitable and just. In fact, because the change
would be so drastic these things have either been held back from serious
consideration or from serious research.

The first is mandatory DNA testing at birth. This is such a simple and
sensible approach to eliminating paternity fraud and is something that
because the primary potential beneficiaries would be men, is going to be
decades in the making. The idea of reducing options for women is so
politically incorrect that even the "best interests of the child" pale
before it.

The second, and in my opinion most important one, is the male birth
control pill. It has been decades supposedly in the making,(although it's
finally been done, and with 100% effectiveness, but we have yet to see it on
the market), but because it is 100% effective, it again has the potential to
reduce paternity fraud and takes an option away from women and gives it to
men. Men should be clamoring for the release of the pill.

I find it amusing when women say,(about men taking their pill), "I
wouldn't trust a man to take his pill. It's not like he would get pregnant".
No, only the woman has to go through all the physical changes that accompany
pregnancy and childbirth for about 9 months. And that's if they don't avail
themselves to the myriad of options open to women only. As things are a man
can only wait to see what the women is going to choose to see how it is
going to affect the rest of his life, not just 9 months.

And if women are truly concerned that a man couldn't be trusted to take the
pill this is not a bad thing, if it will keep women taking their own birth
control as well. Then what are the chances of an unwanted pregnancy? Just
think of it, what are the chances of a guy "oopsing" a woman? That women
"oops" men with an alarming frequency is a very sad fact. In fact I think
it's the idea of taking the responsibility for birth control out of women's
hands that is the biggest reason for the lack of male pills.

I believe that men would not just welcome male birth control pills, but
that they would embrace them with such enthusiasm that the pharmaceutical
companies would be hard pressed to keep up with demand at first. In fact, I
can see NOW and their ilk rallying against male birth control using the
argument that the birth rates are rapidly declining, (with 6 billion people
on this planet I wouldn't concern myself until it got down to oh say, 2
billion people). While anyone involved in the family courts would oppose it
based on the fact that they would begin to lose their cash cow of men paying
child support. The advent of the male birth control pill is so huge that
there will be repercussions radiating throughout every facet of the
government, the economy and even the social strata.

So when will we see male birth control pills or routine DNA testing? Two
approaches that are exquisite in their simplicity, but that benefit men
primarily. Only when women find a way to use them to their advantage.
Women not only have all the options before, during and after pregnancy but
perhaps they are holding up the future options as well?


~AZ~

Brad
June 27th 03, 03:17 AM
Please post the source of your information about male birth control pills.
And please be specific.

Thanks.

Brad


"AZ Astrea" > wrote in message
...
....
>
> The second, and in my opinion most important one, is the male birth
> control pill. It has been decades supposedly in the making,(although it's
> finally been done, and with 100% effectiveness, but we have yet to see it
on
> the market), but because it is 100% effective, it again has the potential
to
> reduce paternity fraud and takes an option away from women and gives it to
> men. Men should be clamoring for the release of the pill.
....
>
> ~AZ~

Father Drew
June 27th 03, 05:20 AM
I'm getting mine tomorrow. I wouldn't trust a pill anyway, not on something
this important. Tomorrow I'm taking the day off to get my nuts chopped.
Scared to death, but more scared of going though this mess all over again.
For anyone that has looked into this, it's not a fun thing to go through.
The doc says it's not so bad, and he got snipped himself, but I don't care,
anytime you put a knife by the jewels, it can't be considered a happy time.
They make you shave too, so I'm sure the itching will creep in sometime next
week. My package looks like Dr. Phil's head.
I'll be sure to post the details tomorrow night to let you know how bad it
is, but I would be wary of the pills.

-Drew


"Brad" > wrote in message
.. .
> Please post the source of your information about male birth control pills.
> And please be specific.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Brad
>
>
> "AZ Astrea" > wrote in message
> ...
> ...
> >
> > The second, and in my opinion most important one, is the male birth
> > control pill. It has been decades supposedly in the making,(although
it's
> > finally been done, and with 100% effectiveness, but we have yet to see
it
> on
> > the market), but because it is 100% effective, it again has the
potential
> to
> > reduce paternity fraud and takes an option away from women and gives it
to
> > men. Men should be clamoring for the release of the pill.
> ...
> >
> > ~AZ~
>
>
>

Brad
June 27th 03, 05:51 AM
The nutectomy will only keep you from getting someone pregnant. It won't
save you from a woman who names you as father of her child, but "doesn't
know where you are." The DA won't try to find you, and a default judgment
will be made against you. You'll get the tab after it's added up for a
while, and it will be too late for DNA. Have a nice day.

Brad

PS: Please don't post any images of your operation.


"Father Drew" > wrote in message
news:%GPKa.172090$eJ2.107604@fed1read07...
> I'm getting mine tomorrow. I wouldn't trust a pill anyway, not on
something
> this important. Tomorrow I'm taking the day off to get my nuts chopped.
> Scared to death, but more scared of going though this mess all over again.
> For anyone that has looked into this, it's not a fun thing to go through.
> The doc says it's not so bad, and he got snipped himself, but I don't
care,
> anytime you put a knife by the jewels, it can't be considered a happy
time.
> They make you shave too, so I'm sure the itching will creep in sometime
next
> week. My package looks like Dr. Phil's head.
> I'll be sure to post the details tomorrow night to let you know how bad it
> is, but I would be wary of the pills.
>
> -Drew
>
>
> "Brad" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > Please post the source of your information about male birth control
pills.
> > And please be specific.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Brad
> >
> >
> > "AZ Astrea" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > ...
> > >
> > > The second, and in my opinion most important one, is the male birth
> > > control pill. It has been decades supposedly in the making,(although
> it's
> > > finally been done, and with 100% effectiveness, but we have yet to see
> it
> > on
> > > the market), but because it is 100% effective, it again has the
> potential
> > to
> > > reduce paternity fraud and takes an option away from women and gives
it
> to
> > > men. Men should be clamoring for the release of the pill.
> > ...
> > >
> > > ~AZ~
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Father Drew
June 27th 03, 06:27 AM
Hahaha, no images? I'll spare you the visuals Brad.
You are wrong about the DNA, at least in AZ. There is only a year to
contest if I remarry and a kid is born, but of course I would contest if I
was dumb enough to remarry, especially knowing my little walletts don't swim
anymore. As for a girlfriend getting pregnate, I would love to be brought
into court to fight it. The first step is paternity establishment.
Obviously I will pass that, then file for sanctions if I incurred any cost
for the DNA test, not to mention any time off from work, pain and suffering
ect. I'm not worried.

-Drew

"Brad" > wrote in message
.. .
> The nutectomy will only keep you from getting someone pregnant. It won't
> save you from a woman who names you as father of her child, but "doesn't
> know where you are." The DA won't try to find you, and a default judgment
> will be made against you. You'll get the tab after it's added up for a
> while, and it will be too late for DNA. Have a nice day.
>
> Brad
>
> PS: Please don't post any images of your operation.
>
>
> "Father Drew" > wrote in message
> news:%GPKa.172090$eJ2.107604@fed1read07...
> > I'm getting mine tomorrow. I wouldn't trust a pill anyway, not on
> something
> > this important. Tomorrow I'm taking the day off to get my nuts chopped.
> > Scared to death, but more scared of going though this mess all over
again.
> > For anyone that has looked into this, it's not a fun thing to go
through.
> > The doc says it's not so bad, and he got snipped himself, but I don't
> care,
> > anytime you put a knife by the jewels, it can't be considered a happy
> time.
> > They make you shave too, so I'm sure the itching will creep in sometime
> next
> > week. My package looks like Dr. Phil's head.
> > I'll be sure to post the details tomorrow night to let you know how bad
it
> > is, but I would be wary of the pills.
> >
> > -Drew
> >
> >
> > "Brad" > wrote in message
> > .. .
> > > Please post the source of your information about male birth control
> pills.
> > > And please be specific.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > Brad
> > >
> > >
> > > "AZ Astrea" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > The second, and in my opinion most important one, is the male
birth
> > > > control pill. It has been decades supposedly in the
making,(although
> > it's
> > > > finally been done, and with 100% effectiveness, but we have yet to
see
> > it
> > > on
> > > > the market), but because it is 100% effective, it again has the
> > potential
> > > to
> > > > reduce paternity fraud and takes an option away from women and gives
> it
> > to
> > > > men. Men should be clamoring for the release of the pill.
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > ~AZ~
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Barry Pearson
June 27th 03, 11:14 AM
AZ Astrea > wrote:
> If you conceive a way to assure every child is wanted and loved you're a
> genius. If you think that the family court would allow you to disseminate
> that knowledge you're crazy.

Your objective is good. I believe that family courts wouldn't necessarily
oppose your objective. But they would oppose specific measures which would
contribute to it, because they would not rate your objective as important as
other things. I'll go further below. By the way, I live in the UK, so what I
say may not apply elsewhere.

> There are two things, I think, that would change the current sad state
> of affairs to something more equitable and just. In fact, because the
> change would be so drastic these things have either been held back from
> serious consideration or from serious research.
>
> The first is mandatory DNA testing at birth. This is such a simple and
> sensible approach to eliminating paternity fraud and is something that
> because the primary potential beneficiaries would be men, is going to be
> decades in the making. The idea of reducing options for women is so
> politically incorrect that even the "best interests of the child" pale
> before it.

Currently I'm not convinced about mandatory testing. It sounds like state
intrusion into private morality, it might have significant cost, and might
deter some women from seeking suitable health care at birth - they might try
to "go it alone". But I don't have a rigid objection to this - I just feel
very uncomfortable with it.

I do favour ready access to home testing kits for paternity testing, including
motherless kits. Unfortunately, in the UK (and Australia) there are moves by
some politicians and others to ban such services and/or criminalise the use of
them without the mother's permission. (I started another thread on that
topic).

I have written 2 papers on the topic of paternity testing & eliminating
"surprising paternity", and submitted them to the UK's Human Genetics
Commission. They are available, both as online versions and Word versions, at
the following URL (look for "The Truth is out there" and "Knowledge is
bliss"):
http://www.childsupportanalysis.co.uk/articles_and_papers.htm

I have tried to make the case that it is ethically right for men & children to
be able to determine paternity without the mother being involved. Increasingly
courts are accepting (at least in the UK and Europe as a whole) that children
have the right to knowledge of their paternity, even if the mother doesn't
agree.

> The second, and in my opinion most important one, is the male birth
> control pill. It has been decades supposedly in the making,(although it's
> finally been done, and with 100% effectiveness, but we have yet to see it
> on the market), but because it is 100% effective, it again has the
> potential to reduce paternity fraud and takes an option away from women
> and gives it to men. Men should be clamoring for the release of the pill.
[snip]

This is an important site:
http://www.malecontraceptives.org/

I have a lot of discussion of the above topics, reached from:
http://www.childsupportanalysis.co.uk/choices_and_behaviours.htm
It includes links to surveys on whether women favour men having such
contraceptives. Many do, while others wouldn't trust men to use them but
wouldn't object. Few women say that men shouldn't have them - but perhaps some
women think that but just don't say it.

I believe that the so-called male pill has not reached the stage you claim. It
is a long way, for example, from being submitted to the FDA. But there are
other interesting possibilities. One is RISUG. It comes from India, where it
has passed its trials. The doctor who introduced scalpel-less vasectomies into
Canada wants to introduce this into Canada, but told me it would probably be 5
years or more.

I believe people should be lobbying hard for these next generation of male
contraceptives (all kinds). But I have also detected a backlash from some men,
who say the answer is not better contraception for men, it is C4M. I believe
there are those who believe that better male contracetives for men would
remove any last hope of C4M.

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/
http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/

Barry Pearson
June 27th 03, 11:14 AM
Brad > wrote:
> Please post the source of your information about male birth control pills.
> And please be specific.

I have a few pages on the topic at the following:

http://www.childsupportanalysis.co.uk/analysis_and_opinion/choices_and_behaviours/male_contraception_overview.htm

http://tinyurl.com/feqy

This is an important site:
http://www.malecontraceptives.org/

> "AZ Astrea" > wrote in message
> ...
> ...
> > The second, and in my opinion most important one, is the male birth
> > control pill. It has been decades supposedly in the making,(although
> > it's finally been done, and with 100% effectiveness, but we have yet to
> > see it on the market), but because it is 100% effective, it again has
> > the potential to reduce paternity fraud and takes an option away from
> > women and gives it to men. Men should be clamoring for the release of
> > the pill.

--
Barry Pearson
http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/
http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/

Phil #3
June 27th 03, 02:31 PM
"Father Drew" > wrote in message
news:%GPKa.172090$eJ2.107604@fed1read07...
> I'm getting mine tomorrow. I wouldn't trust a pill anyway, not on
something
> this important. Tomorrow I'm taking the day off to get my nuts chopped.
> Scared to death, but more scared of going though this mess all over again.
> For anyone that has looked into this, it's not a fun thing to go through.
> The doc says it's not so bad, and he got snipped himself, but I don't
care,
> anytime you put a knife by the jewels, it can't be considered a happy
time.
> They make you shave too, so I'm sure the itching will creep in sometime
next
> week. My package looks like Dr. Phil's head.
> I'll be sure to post the details tomorrow night to let you know how bad it
> is, but I would be wary of the pills.
>
> -Drew

It ain't all that bad. There will likely be some bruising due to the
increased vascularity in that region and it may extend down your legs as
well (your scrotum *will* be purple, it's quite decorative, actually :D).
The actual procedure is relatively painless, even the initial needle sticks
are well within my range of acceptable pains, and I hate shots. The only
caveat is that the doctor use ample anesthetic (mine didn't, but my
acquaintances assure me theirs did).
Take a movie home with you and try to sleep, as best you can with an iceberg
on your groin.
Of the men I've known having this procedure, one other and myself have had
some acute residual pains. Because it was always associated with the snipped
vas, the pain was in the abdominal cavity, not in the scrotum. (The vas
takes a long trip to the prostate).
Oh, and in case no one told you, you won't be sterile for several weeks due
to the accumulated sperm along the path from the actual cut in the vas to
the urethra. Get a sperm count done after about a month and yearly or
semi-annually, thereafter.
I've never regretted it after 12 years.
Phil #3

>
>
> "Brad" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > Please post the source of your information about male birth control
pills.
> > And please be specific.
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > Brad
> >
> >
> > "AZ Astrea" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > ...
> > >
> > > The second, and in my opinion most important one, is the male birth
> > > control pill. It has been decades supposedly in the making,(although
> it's
> > > finally been done, and with 100% effectiveness, but we have yet to see
> it
> > on
> > > the market), but because it is 100% effective, it again has the
> potential
> > to
> > > reduce paternity fraud and takes an option away from women and gives
it
> to
> > > men. Men should be clamoring for the release of the pill.
> > ...
> > >
> > > ~AZ~
> >
> >
> >
>
>

The DaveŠ
June 27th 03, 05:14 PM
"Father Drew" wrote
> I'm getting mine tomorrow. I wouldn't trust a pill
> anyway, not on something this important. Tomorrow
> I'm taking the day off to get my nuts chopped. Scared
> to death, but more scared of going though this mess
> all over again. For anyone that has looked into this,
> it's not a fun thing to go through. The doc says it's not
> so bad, and he got snipped himself, but I don't care,
> anytime you put a knife by the jewels, it can't be
> considered a happy time. They make you shave too,
> so I'm sure the itching will creep in sometime next
> week. My package looks like Dr. Phil's head.
> I'll be sure to post the details tomorrow night to let
> you know how bad it is, but I would be wary of the pills.

By the time you see this, it'll be done, but I can say it really isn't that
big of a deal. Yes, it's uncomfortable, but it doesn't hurt. I was sore
and moved slowly for about a day, but after that was fine.

Tracy
June 27th 03, 05:39 PM
"AZ Astrea" > wrote in message
...
> If you conceive a way to assure every child is wanted and loved you're a
> genius. If you think that the family court would allow you to disseminate
> that knowledge you're crazy.


[snipped]

Mandatory DNA tests and the male birth control pill will *not* give every
child what they want. Even planned children are left out in the cold in
terms of love from their parents. If you really look at children which are
deprived of love from their parents - no matter if the lack of love is from
divorce or otherwise - those two items you mention will not solve nothing.
Determining *who* is the child's father won't guarantee to a child they will
be loved. Providing men a birth control pill won't guarantee to a child
they will be loved. The only way you can guarantee that love is to provide
a change of attitude overall - across all people. That is impossible.

Don't *use* children as an excuse to push for mandatory DNA testing and a
male birth control pill. Don't do what NOW, and other feminist-extremist,
has done. The current system is NOT for the child. The current system is
for the "parents". Adding more to it will not fix it... nor will it provide
any love for the child. Big deal - the child will know *who* daddy is, or
who daddy is not. It won't provide love.


Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein

*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***

Tracy
June 27th 03, 06:25 PM
"Father Drew" > wrote in message
news:aFQKa.172100$eJ2.17812@fed1read07...
> Hahaha, no images? I'll spare you the visuals Brad.
> You are wrong about the DNA, at least in AZ. There is only a year to
> contest if I remarry and a kid is born, but of course I would contest if I
> was dumb enough to remarry, especially knowing my little walletts don't
swim
> anymore. As for a girlfriend getting pregnate, I would love to be brought
> into court to fight it. The first step is paternity establishment.
> Obviously I will pass that, then file for sanctions if I incurred any cost
> for the DNA test, not to mention any time off from work, pain and
suffering
> ect. I'm not worried.


Drew... there is a failure rate. I knew a man who was snipped and his wife
still spit out two more children - their first two were planned. After
their fourth child was born she had a tubal.

It is very rare that the body will heal thyself, but it does happen.


Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein

*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***


>
> -Drew
>
> "Brad" > wrote in message
> .. .
> > The nutectomy will only keep you from getting someone pregnant. It
won't
> > save you from a woman who names you as father of her child, but "doesn't
> > know where you are." The DA won't try to find you, and a default
judgment
> > will be made against you. You'll get the tab after it's added up for a
> > while, and it will be too late for DNA. Have a nice day.
> >
> > Brad
> >
> > PS: Please don't post any images of your operation.
> >
> >
> > "Father Drew" > wrote in message
> > news:%GPKa.172090$eJ2.107604@fed1read07...
> > > I'm getting mine tomorrow. I wouldn't trust a pill anyway, not on
> > something
> > > this important. Tomorrow I'm taking the day off to get my nuts
chopped.
> > > Scared to death, but more scared of going though this mess all over
> again.
> > > For anyone that has looked into this, it's not a fun thing to go
> through.
> > > The doc says it's not so bad, and he got snipped himself, but I don't
> > care,
> > > anytime you put a knife by the jewels, it can't be considered a happy
> > time.
> > > They make you shave too, so I'm sure the itching will creep in
sometime
> > next
> > > week. My package looks like Dr. Phil's head.
> > > I'll be sure to post the details tomorrow night to let you know how
bad
> it
> > > is, but I would be wary of the pills.
> > >
> > > -Drew
> > >
> > >
> > > "Brad" > wrote in message
> > > .. .
> > > > Please post the source of your information about male birth control
> > pills.
> > > > And please be specific.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Brad
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "AZ Astrea" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > The second, and in my opinion most important one, is the male
> birth
> > > > > control pill. It has been decades supposedly in the
> making,(although
> > > it's
> > > > > finally been done, and with 100% effectiveness, but we have yet to
> see
> > > it
> > > > on
> > > > > the market), but because it is 100% effective, it again has the
> > > potential
> > > > to
> > > > > reduce paternity fraud and takes an option away from women and
gives
> > it
> > > to
> > > > > men. Men should be clamoring for the release of the pill.
> > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > ~AZ~
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Tracy
June 27th 03, 06:30 PM
"The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
s.com...
> "Father Drew" wrote
> > I'm getting mine tomorrow. I wouldn't trust a pill
> > anyway, not on something this important. Tomorrow
> > I'm taking the day off to get my nuts chopped. Scared
> > to death, but more scared of going though this mess
> > all over again. For anyone that has looked into this,
> > it's not a fun thing to go through. The doc says it's not
> > so bad, and he got snipped himself, but I don't care,
> > anytime you put a knife by the jewels, it can't be
> > considered a happy time. They make you shave too,
> > so I'm sure the itching will creep in sometime next
> > week. My package looks like Dr. Phil's head.
> > I'll be sure to post the details tomorrow night to let
> > you know how bad it is, but I would be wary of the pills.
>
> By the time you see this, it'll be done, but I can say it really isn't
that
> big of a deal. Yes, it's uncomfortable, but it doesn't hurt. I was sore
> and moved slowly for about a day, but after that was fine.


wow... you're lucky. When I had my tubel they had to cut through the abs
(small cuts), so I was in pain for a while. I'm not looking forward to ever
having my abs sliced again...


Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein

*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***

The DaveŠ
June 27th 03, 08:07 PM
"Tracy" wrote
> I'm sure the male pill is similar to the female version.
> There is a failure rate. Nothing is 100% guaranteed.
> Not even sterilization is 100% guaranteed.

That was my thought when I read it, too. Nothing is 100%. You can get
pretty close, though.

> Mine (tubal ligation) came with a 1 in every 1200 chance
> of failure.

Does that mean some women should worry when they get near their 1200th time?
;-) (ok, I'm kidding)

Tracy
June 27th 03, 08:32 PM
"The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
s.com...
> "Tracy" wrote
> > wow... you're lucky. When I had my tubel they had to
> > cut through the abs (small cuts), so I was in pain for a
> > while. I'm not looking forward to ever having my abs
> > sliced again...
>
> I've heard that it's actually worse for women. Men are so wimpy in this
> area. Sheesh! ;-)

Dave, if my bf told me he was getting one I'd throw myself between him and
his doctor as an attempt to stop it! We don't need it, and *I* want that
area left alone. ;-)


> For me, the worst part was the embarrassment of two nurses "playing
around"
> down there before the doctor came in. They taped *it* out of the way, and
> seemed to take pleasure in literally ripping the tape off afterward.
> Because of the local, I didn't feel a thing.

ouch! I wonder if that is like having a wax job. :)


Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein

*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***

Tracy
June 27th 03, 08:33 PM
"The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
s.com...
> "Tracy" wrote
> > I'm sure the male pill is similar to the female version.
> > There is a failure rate. Nothing is 100% guaranteed.
> > Not even sterilization is 100% guaranteed.
>
> That was my thought when I read it, too. Nothing is 100%. You can get
> pretty close, though.

exactly.


> > Mine (tubal ligation) came with a 1 in every 1200 chance
> > of failure.
>
> Does that mean some women should worry when they get near their 1200th
time?
> ;-) (ok, I'm kidding)


I thought about that! I use to tell myself that wish *my* luck after my
1199th time I'd get pregnant. So I thought about keeping track. LOL


Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein

*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***

TeacherMama
June 28th 03, 12:16 AM
"The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
s.com...
> "Tracy" wrote
> > wow... you're lucky. When I had my tubel they had to
> > cut through the abs (small cuts), so I was in pain for a
> > while. I'm not looking forward to ever having my abs
> > sliced again...
>
> I've heard that it's actually worse for women. Men are so wimpy in this
> area. Sheesh! ;-)
>
> For me, the worst part was the embarrassment of two nurses "playing
around"
> down there before the doctor came in. They taped *it* out of the way, and
> seemed to take pleasure in literally ripping the tape off afterward.
> Because of the local, I didn't feel a thing.

Sounds like they've found a way to vent their anger at the men in their
lives without having to harm their men!! (chuckle--just kidding)

TeacherMama
June 28th 03, 12:18 AM
"Tracy" > wrote in message
news:E_0La.36108$3d.20046@sccrnsc02...
> "The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
> s.com...
> > "Tracy" wrote
> > > I'm sure the male pill is similar to the female version.
> > > There is a failure rate. Nothing is 100% guaranteed.
> > > Not even sterilization is 100% guaranteed.
> >
> > That was my thought when I read it, too. Nothing is 100%. You can get
> > pretty close, though.
>
> exactly.
>
>
> > > Mine (tubal ligation) came with a 1 in every 1200 chance
> > > of failure.
> >
> > Does that mean some women should worry when they get near their 1200th
> time?
> > ;-) (ok, I'm kidding)
>
>
> I thought about that! I use to tell myself that wish *my* luck after my
> 1199th time I'd get pregnant. So I thought about keeping track. LOL

A common error. The statistic is one in 1200---that doesn't mean the 1200th
time. It can be any number within that 1200!! Ya gotta be careful about
these things!

Kenneth S.
June 28th 03, 02:17 AM
TeacherMama wrote:
>
> "Tracy" > wrote in message
> news:E_0La.36108$3d.20046@sccrnsc02...
> > "The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
> > s.com...
> > > "Tracy" wrote
> > > > I'm sure the male pill is similar to the female version.
> > > > There is a failure rate. Nothing is 100% guaranteed.
> > > > Not even sterilization is 100% guaranteed.
> > >
> > > That was my thought when I read it, too. Nothing is 100%. You can get
> > > pretty close, though.
> >
> > exactly.
> >
> >
> > > > Mine (tubal ligation) came with a 1 in every 1200 chance
> > > > of failure.
> > >
> > > Does that mean some women should worry when they get near their 1200th
> > time?
> > > ;-) (ok, I'm kidding)
> >
> >
> > I thought about that! I use to tell myself that wish *my* luck after my
> > 1199th time I'd get pregnant. So I thought about keeping track. LOL
>
> A common error. The statistic is one in 1200---that doesn't mean the 1200th
> time. It can be any number within that 1200!! Ya gotta be careful about
> these things!

We mustn't go off at a tangent, I suppose, but why is it wrong to say
that the more often you do something that carries a small risk, the more
likely it is that the small probability will actually occur? If
climbing Mount Everest is risky, then the more times you do it, the
greater the chance that you'll meet your end up there.

I'd keep counting if I were you, Tracy. And make sure you get it
right. Put a big piece of squared paper above your bed, and mark off
each time with an X. That's sure to prove very romantic, particularly
when you get closer to 1200. It'll be a thrill! And, don't forget
that, if the worst happens, you'll be able to collect the money that is
the subject of this news group.

Tracy
June 28th 03, 02:22 AM
"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...

> I'd keep counting if I were you, Tracy. And make sure you get it
> right. Put a big piece of squared paper above your bed, and mark off
> each time with an X. That's sure to prove very romantic, particularly
> when you get closer to 1200. It'll be a thrill! And, don't forget
> that, if the worst happens, you'll be able to collect the money that is
> the subject of this news group.

butthead... :-p

I'll tell you what... once, only once, did my bf mention having sex with his
ex-wife. He quickly apologized for it. I just looked at him and "acted"
shocked that they had sex! I mean really now... married for over 21 years
and having sex. What is the world coming to? :-)


Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein

*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***

TeacherMama
June 28th 03, 03:52 AM
"Kenneth S." > wrote in message
...
> TeacherMama wrote:
> >
> > "Tracy" > wrote in message
> > news:E_0La.36108$3d.20046@sccrnsc02...
> > > "The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
> > > s.com...
> > > > "Tracy" wrote
> > > > > I'm sure the male pill is similar to the female version.
> > > > > There is a failure rate. Nothing is 100% guaranteed.
> > > > > Not even sterilization is 100% guaranteed.
> > > >
> > > > That was my thought when I read it, too. Nothing is 100%. You can
get
> > > > pretty close, though.
> > >
> > > exactly.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Mine (tubal ligation) came with a 1 in every 1200 chance
> > > > > of failure.
> > > >
> > > > Does that mean some women should worry when they get near their
1200th
> > > time?
> > > > ;-) (ok, I'm kidding)
> > >
> > >
> > > I thought about that! I use to tell myself that wish *my* luck after
my
> > > 1199th time I'd get pregnant. So I thought about keeping track. LOL
> >
> > A common error. The statistic is one in 1200---that doesn't mean the
1200th
> > time. It can be any number within that 1200!! Ya gotta be careful
about
> > these things!
>
> We mustn't go off at a tangent, I suppose, but why is it wrong to say
> that the more often you do something that carries a small risk, the more
> likely it is that the small probability will actually occur? If
> climbing Mount Everest is risky, then the more times you do it, the
> greater the chance that you'll meet your end up there.
>
> I'd keep counting if I were you, Tracy. And make sure you get it
> right. Put a big piece of squared paper above your bed, and mark off
> each time with an X. That's sure to prove very romantic, particularly
> when you get closer to 1200. It'll be a thrill! And, don't forget
> that, if the worst happens, you'll be able to collect the money that is
> the subject of this news group.

<chuckle> Too funny!

I read about a couple who had 3 kids and were content with that, so he got
done. All was well for a while, then she became pregnant. He had healed!!

So, after the baby, she had her tubes tied. A couple of years later--baby
5!! She had come untied!

So he went back and got done again and she had the tubes cut and tied (or
whatever they do) Anyway--pathway is severed, so no more babies, right?

Nope--a few years later--here we go again!! This time she had a
hysterectomy!

Their comment was "God must have wanted us to have 6 kids." <chuckle>

The article said it was a 1 in umpteen million chance. Imagine the marks
over their bed!

Bob Whiteside
June 28th 03, 05:36 AM
"Father Drew" > wrote in message
news:wG8La.172350$eJ2.148194@fed1read07...
> You are a bigger man than me Phil...or a smaller man with less pain
> coverage. I thought thought the procedure was painful. I've been in bed
> all day, just ended nap #3. I thought the needle was a bitch. It's like
a
> shaot and getting kicked in the sack at the same time. Very scaring
waiting
> on the table for the pain to arrive. I think I was less scared when I
went
> skydiving. It was painful, but not real bad. Most of it was
psycological.
> Although I was numb, I could feel the pressure and hear the sounds of
tubes
> snapping, not fun. I don't have tie-dyed nuts, just little cuts on each
> side (that stuck to the gauze and bled when I peeled it off).
> The entire thing cost me $25. I have to think how much money I would have
> had I spent that $25 6 years ago. Of course I don't regret the kids, but
am
> glad this is over. I gotta respect any man with the balls big enough to
do
> this.
> Now I have to decide if I will tell future gfs about this.

Don't worry. They'll screw first and ask questions later. They'll say
things after the sex like "Gee, you really filled me up. When did you have
your vasectomy?" Like, hello! Are women really that stupid or just hoping
for the next CS check?

Chris
June 28th 03, 06:17 AM
"Father Drew" > wrote in message
news:wG8La.172350$eJ2.148194@fed1read07...
> You are a bigger man than me Phil...or a smaller man with less pain
> coverage.

Now you know how they came up with the term "numbnuts"?

> I thought thought the procedure was painful. I've been in bed
> all day, just ended nap #3. I thought the needle was a bitch. It's like
a
> shaot and getting kicked in the sack at the same time. Very scaring
waiting
> on the table for the pain to arrive. I think I was less scared when I
went
> skydiving. It was painful, but not real bad. Most of it was
psycological.
> Although I was numb, I could feel the pressure and hear the sounds of
tubes
> snapping, not fun. I don't have tie-dyed nuts, just little cuts on each
> side (that stuck to the gauze and bled when I peeled it off).
> The entire thing cost me $25. I have to think how much money I would have
> had I spent that $25 6 years ago. Of course I don't regret the kids, but
am
> glad this is over. I gotta respect any man with the balls big enough to
do
> this.
> Now I have to decide if I will tell future gfs about this.
>
> -Drew
>
> "Phil #3" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Father Drew" > wrote in message
> > news:%GPKa.172090$eJ2.107604@fed1read07...
> > > I'm getting mine tomorrow. I wouldn't trust a pill anyway, not on
> > something
> > > this important. Tomorrow I'm taking the day off to get my nuts
chopped.
> > > Scared to death, but more scared of going though this mess all over
> again.
> > > For anyone that has looked into this, it's not a fun thing to go
> through.
> > > The doc says it's not so bad, and he got snipped himself, but I don't
> > care,
> > > anytime you put a knife by the jewels, it can't be considered a happy
> > time.
> > > They make you shave too, so I'm sure the itching will creep in
sometime
> > next
> > > week. My package looks like Dr. Phil's head.
> > > I'll be sure to post the details tomorrow night to let you know how
bad
> it
> > > is, but I would be wary of the pills.
> > >
> > > -Drew
> >
> > It ain't all that bad. There will likely be some bruising due to the
> > increased vascularity in that region and it may extend down your legs as
> > well (your scrotum *will* be purple, it's quite decorative, actually
:D).
> > The actual procedure is relatively painless, even the initial needle
> sticks
> > are well within my range of acceptable pains, and I hate shots. The only
> > caveat is that the doctor use ample anesthetic (mine didn't, but my
> > acquaintances assure me theirs did).
> > Take a movie home with you and try to sleep, as best you can with an
> iceberg
> > on your groin.
> > Of the men I've known having this procedure, one other and myself have
had
> > some acute residual pains. Because it was always associated with the
> snipped
> > vas, the pain was in the abdominal cavity, not in the scrotum. (The vas
> > takes a long trip to the prostate).
> > Oh, and in case no one told you, you won't be sterile for several weeks
> due
> > to the accumulated sperm along the path from the actual cut in the vas
to
> > the urethra. Get a sperm count done after about a month and yearly or
> > semi-annually, thereafter.
> > I've never regretted it after 12 years.
> > Phil #3
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > "Brad" > wrote in message
> > > .. .
> > > > Please post the source of your information about male birth control
> > pills.
> > > > And please be specific.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Brad
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "AZ Astrea" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > The second, and in my opinion most important one, is the male
> birth
> > > > > control pill. It has been decades supposedly in the
> making,(although
> > > it's
> > > > > finally been done, and with 100% effectiveness, but we have yet to
> see
> > > it
> > > > on
> > > > > the market), but because it is 100% effective, it again has the
> > > potential
> > > > to
> > > > > reduce paternity fraud and takes an option away from women and
gives
> > it
> > > to
> > > > > men. Men should be clamoring for the release of the pill.
> > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > ~AZ~
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

Father Drew
June 28th 03, 06:39 AM
Depend how you read the statistics. Every time you would have a 1 in 1200
chance. So the 1st time, you have a 1 in 1200 chance, and the 3000th time
yiou still have that same 1 in 1200 chance.

"TeacherMama" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Tracy" > wrote in message
> news:E_0La.36108$3d.20046@sccrnsc02...
> > "The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
> > s.com...
> > > "Tracy" wrote
> > > > I'm sure the male pill is similar to the female version.
> > > > There is a failure rate. Nothing is 100% guaranteed.
> > > > Not even sterilization is 100% guaranteed.
> > >
> > > That was my thought when I read it, too. Nothing is 100%. You can
get
> > > pretty close, though.
> >
> > exactly.
> >
> >
> > > > Mine (tubal ligation) came with a 1 in every 1200 chance
> > > > of failure.
> > >
> > > Does that mean some women should worry when they get near their 1200th
> > time?
> > > ;-) (ok, I'm kidding)
> >
> >
> > I thought about that! I use to tell myself that wish *my* luck after my
> > 1199th time I'd get pregnant. So I thought about keeping track. LOL
>
> A common error. The statistic is one in 1200---that doesn't mean the
1200th
> time. It can be any number within that 1200!! Ya gotta be careful about
> these things!
>
>

Father Drew
June 28th 03, 06:48 AM
They are left to interpretation. One could say that one get 1199 before
they have to wear a condom. Another might say it could happen anytime in
between. Then the National Org of Women might say, "you asshole, get off of
her, rape rape, become a carpet muncher honey!". Just depends on who
interprets it.

Personally. I'm convinced that the experience was traumatic enough to
bee 100% effective. I would hate to think it was all in vein (pun
intended). The doc gave me two jars to fill up (not to the top I hope, I'm
30 for Christ sake). He said I have to have 8 ejaculations before I give
him the two samples for testing the retarded swimmers. The nurse was there,
I told him I could do the 8 plus the 2 samples in one day. The nurse left
and I told the doc, "Just kidding, I'll be back in 2 weeks.". Kinda funny
that they tell people to jack-off every day, and not only do people not get
offended, they pay good money to hear it. I imagine the humor in a
urologist office is pretty good.

-Drew



"Bob Whiteside" > wrote in message
rthlink.net...
>
> "TeacherMama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Tracy" > wrote in message
> > news:E_0La.36108$3d.20046@sccrnsc02...
> > > "The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
> > > s.com...
> > > > "Tracy" wrote
> > > > > I'm sure the male pill is similar to the female version.
> > > > > There is a failure rate. Nothing is 100% guaranteed.
> > > > > Not even sterilization is 100% guaranteed.
> > > >
> > > > That was my thought when I read it, too. Nothing is 100%. You can
> get
> > > > pretty close, though.
> > >
> > > exactly.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Mine (tubal ligation) came with a 1 in every 1200 chance
> > > > > of failure.
> > > >
> > > > Does that mean some women should worry when they get near their
1200th
> > > time?
> > > > ;-) (ok, I'm kidding)
> > >
> > >
> > > I thought about that! I use to tell myself that wish *my* luck after
my
> > > 1199th time I'd get pregnant. So I thought about keeping track. LOL
> >
> > A common error. The statistic is one in 1200---that doesn't mean the
> 1200th
> > time. It can be any number within that 1200!! Ya gotta be careful
about
> > these things!
>
> I must be from Mars and not Venus. I thought the 1 in 1200 chance meant 1
> out of 1200 men who a woman had sex with could actually impregnate her in
> spite of her tubal! Does this mean one guy can do it 1200 times before a
> pregnancy, not 1200 guys doing it once? Man these statistics are hard to
> understand!
>
>

TeacherMama
June 28th 03, 07:36 AM
"Father Drew" > wrote in message
news:vW9La.172372$eJ2.32459@fed1read07...
>
> Depend how you read the statistics. Every time you would have a 1 in 1200
> chance. So the 1st time, you have a 1 in 1200 chance, and the 3000th time
> yiou still have that same 1 in 1200 chance.

That's true. Statistics can always come back to bite you in the butt.

Kenneth S.
June 28th 03, 05:40 PM
Bob Whiteside wrote:
>
> "TeacherMama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Tracy" > wrote in message
> > news:E_0La.36108$3d.20046@sccrnsc02...
> > > "The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
> > > s.com...
> > > > "Tracy" wrote
> > > > > I'm sure the male pill is similar to the female version.
> > > > > There is a failure rate. Nothing is 100% guaranteed.
> > > > > Not even sterilization is 100% guaranteed.
> > > >
> > > > That was my thought when I read it, too. Nothing is 100%. You can
> get
> > > > pretty close, though.
> > >
> > > exactly.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Mine (tubal ligation) came with a 1 in every 1200 chance
> > > > > of failure.
> > > >
> > > > Does that mean some women should worry when they get near their 1200th
> > > time?
> > > > ;-) (ok, I'm kidding)
> > >
> > >
> > > I thought about that! I use to tell myself that wish *my* luck after my
> > > 1199th time I'd get pregnant. So I thought about keeping track. LOL
> >
> > A common error. The statistic is one in 1200---that doesn't mean the
> 1200th
> > time. It can be any number within that 1200!! Ya gotta be careful about
> > these things!
>
> I must be from Mars and not Venus. I thought the 1 in 1200 chance meant 1
> out of 1200 men who a woman had sex with could actually impregnate her in
> spite of her tubal! Does this mean one guy can do it 1200 times before a
> pregnancy, not 1200 guys doing it once? Man these statistics are hard to
> understand!

No, Bob, it's 1,200 guys doing it ALL AT ONCE.

AZ Astrea
June 30th 03, 11:14 AM
Sorry to everyone for posting this and then not responding to comments.
This came to my attention some months ago via a very brief newstory during
the regular news on tv. It was so quick I didn't even catch the doctors
name who was talking about it. What I did catch was that he said that it is
100% effective as well as being 100% reversible. I think the first link is
from the study where the newstory came from.

I did some research and here is what I've found:

http://www.askmen.com/love/dzimmer_60/72_love_answers.html
"From the results of these studies, Organon, a pharmaceutical company in the
Netherlands, has developed a pill that is set to go on the market by 2005.
The pill has proven to be 100% effective in preliminary clinical trials."
"In terms of effectiveness, the male pill seems to be the best. In clinical
trials, all of the participants' sperm counts dropped to zero, which means
that the male pill would be more effective than the condom and even the
female pill."

and this which is from 2002:
http://www.soc.ucsb.edu/sexinfo/?article=contraception&refid=025
"Scientists have found that a sugar molecule, called NB-DNJ, causes fully
reversible sterility in male mice. When the mice are given the drug, they
cannot cause pregnancies. When they are taken off the drug, they regain
their ability to produce healthy and fertile sperm. The drug blocks the
production of certain molecules that are needed for the production of sperm
in the testicles."

This info is dated 2003 :
http://www.plannedparenthood.org/ARTICLES/bcfuture_m.html
"World Health Organization studies have shown greatly reduced sperm counts
in men injected once a week with testosterone enanthate (TE), a synthetic
hormone. Research continues with a combination of TE and
depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA), the progestin used in
Depo-Provera. The combination injection may be needed only once a month.

A potential three-month injection using testosterone buciclate is in
preliminary development."

This research paper is from 2000. Apparantly the biggest obstacle to
finding a male birth control pill is finding funding for the research. US
pharmaceutical companies seem to think that men won't buy or use them.
http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/biology/b103/f00/web3/paluska3.html
Emphasis on the negative side effects in the media demonstrates the
pharmaceutical industry's attitude towards the idea of male birth control.
In an age when Viagra is one of the top selling and top promoted drugs, one
cannot say that the American public is non-receptive to the idea of drugs
that affect men's sexual function. As one author states, "The pill may be a
good idea, but the maximization of profits sought out by large drug
companies, forced upon them by capitalistic ideals, precludes any real
development of this form of contraception"

I particularly loved this line, "The social message is clear - women take
care of birth control and men take care of sexual performance."

Yeah and them men take care of the child support for the rest of their
lives!

Men need to get vocal about wanting this type of birth control. I think it
should be mentioned anytime child support or deadbeat dads or anything is
written about.

~AZ~

AZ Astrea
June 30th 03, 11:20 AM
Wow, thanks Barry!! The malecontraceptives.org is a great site!!!!

~AZ~

"Barry Pearson" > wrote in message
...
> Brad > wrote:
> > Please post the source of your information about male birth control
pills.
> > And please be specific.
>
> I have a few pages on the topic at the following:
>
>
http://www.childsupportanalysis.co.uk/analysis_and_opinion/choices_and_behav
iours/male_contraception_overview.htm
>
> http://tinyurl.com/feqy
>
> This is an important site:
> http://www.malecontraceptives.org/
>
> > "AZ Astrea" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > ...
> > > The second, and in my opinion most important one, is the male birth
> > > control pill. It has been decades supposedly in the making,(although
> > > it's finally been done, and with 100% effectiveness, but we have yet
to
> > > see it on the market), but because it is 100% effective, it again has
> > > the potential to reduce paternity fraud and takes an option away from
> > > women and gives it to men. Men should be clamoring for the release of
> > > the pill.
>
> --
> Barry Pearson
> http://www.Barry.Pearson.name/photography/
> http://www.ChildSupportAnalysis.co.uk/
>
>

The DaveŠ
June 30th 03, 05:24 PM
"Father Drew" wrote
> Now I have to decide if I will tell future gfs about this.

I think it depends on what you're looking for. For me, I wanted a long-term
(hopefully permanent) relationship, so I decided to tell every woman I went
out with more than 3 dates, or so. My reasoning was I wanted there to be no
misunderstandings, and I wanted to feel as secure as possible that she
really wanted me, and everything that did and didn't include.

Tracy
July 3rd 03, 01:25 AM
"Father Drew" > wrote in message
news:vW9La.172372$eJ2.32459@fed1read07...
>
> Depend how you read the statistics. Every time you would have a 1 in 1200
> chance. So the 1st time, you have a 1 in 1200 chance, and the 3000th time
> yiou still have that same 1 in 1200 chance.


That is how I understood it, or better yet - there exists 1 female in every
1200 that will become pregnant after having such a surgery. Thus far I'm
not that 1 female. :) I was just being silly below and playing along with
"The Dave". I'm sure "The Dave" understands what 1 in 1200 means... I think
some people took simple "fun with words" meaning they don't know. ;-)


Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein

*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***


>
> "TeacherMama" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "Tracy" > wrote in message
> > news:E_0La.36108$3d.20046@sccrnsc02...
> > > "The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
> > > s.com...
> > > > "Tracy" wrote
> > > > > I'm sure the male pill is similar to the female version.
> > > > > There is a failure rate. Nothing is 100% guaranteed.
> > > > > Not even sterilization is 100% guaranteed.
> > > >
> > > > That was my thought when I read it, too. Nothing is 100%. You can
> get
> > > > pretty close, though.
> > >
> > > exactly.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > Mine (tubal ligation) came with a 1 in every 1200 chance
> > > > > of failure.
> > > >
> > > > Does that mean some women should worry when they get near their
1200th
> > > time?
> > > > ;-) (ok, I'm kidding)
> > >
> > >
> > > I thought about that! I use to tell myself that wish *my* luck after
my
> > > 1199th time I'd get pregnant. So I thought about keeping track. LOL
> >
> > A common error. The statistic is one in 1200---that doesn't mean the
> 1200th
> > time. It can be any number within that 1200!! Ya gotta be careful
about
> > these things!
> >
> >
>
>

Tracy
July 3rd 03, 01:39 AM
"The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
s.com...
> "Father Drew" wrote
> > Now I have to decide if I will tell future gfs about this.
>
> I think it depends on what you're looking for. For me, I wanted a
long-term
> (hopefully permanent) relationship, so I decided to tell every woman I
went
> out with more than 3 dates, or so. My reasoning was I wanted there to be
no
> misunderstandings, and I wanted to feel as secure as possible that she
> really wanted me, and everything that did and didn't include.


I use mine as a screening tool. I bluntly tell them that I don't want
anymore children and I've taken care of my end of the deal by having a
tubal. They are notified of this up front and in advance - not after any
dates. I feel the topic of having children is important enough to make my
position very clear. I suggest to any man considering dating a women to let
her know up front. Why waste someone's time, or put them in an awkward
position sometime in the future?

Let me tell you a story.. The first man I dated after I split with my ex I
dated for over two years. Towards the end of our dating history we had a
date set and an idea for our rings... in other words we were planning on
getting married. We planned for me to finish an associates degree (he had a
thing about his wife making more than him), us to purchase a home, and to
have a child together. Just one child. After the birth of our child him &
I would get snipped. Sounded great... then the man got a hair up his butt
and "changed" his mind. He told me while throwing a fit that he scheduled a
snip job for himself. That hurt... the idea that he was going to do
something like that when *we* had plans to have a child - really hurt. I
felt deceived. I didn't storm out. I didn't threaten to leave. I just
cried, because I was hurt. I was faced with a very nasty decision...
continue with our relationship, get married, and never have another child...
or leave a man that I loved very deeply. We ended up breaking up that
night - more his choice than anything, and after he continued to push other
buttons of mine. In the long run, did he have it done? no - he wanted to
know how I would react - so he told me. We remained friends, but it took
years of us not talking before we could talk without leaving someone hurt
(sadden at the loss of our relationship).

So really guys... let them know up front and be honest. I've met guys that
wanted children that I wouldn't date because I could never give them what
they wanted - to be a father. It is best to just not go there and hurt
someone like that. Sure no one should be hurt after three dates... but
still.


Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein

*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***

Tracy
July 3rd 03, 05:49 PM
"The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
s.com...
> I probably should clarify a bit. I have always told by the third date, at
> the latest. Many times much sooner. Generally, whenever it came up in
> conversation. When actively dating and meeting people via the internet
> personals, I would always get to know the other person a minimum of three
> weeks (and up to six weeks) before I would ever meet them in person.
There
> were many reasons for that. Anyway, usually this would come up during
that
> "get to know" process before the first date ever happened. I agree with
you
> that it should always be up front someplace.


Wow - a min. of 3 weeks before meeting them. Most of the men that answered
my ad wanted to meet right away. I never put any time limits on anything,
and I'm really an impatient person. My current bf is not into emails, or
the internet!!! :-) So we started talking via phone, which normally I
wouldn't do until after the first date. I took a chance and I'm glad I did.
We talked for a couple of weeks before setting up our first date. Last
night we spent a good hour just talking about our future. Ok, we've would
have talked longer, but his phone died & he couldn't find his other phones.
Anyways - we've been talking about the big-M and there is so much more going
on, plus other things... we made a decision last night. He is going to take
his home off the market, and we're going to wait until the kids are either
almost done, or done, with school next year to decide what we're going to
do. We understand we're moving way too fast right now, but it is hard to
remain level headed when your heart is wanting to drag you in another
direction. It is probably a good thing both of us are too damn scared to
really tell each other how we feel. Instead we just talk around it. LOL
Kind of silly, but it is so much better than wondering if you'll ever be
capable of loving someone else again.


Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein

*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***


>
> "Tracy" wrote
> > "The DaveŠ" wrote in message
> > > "Father Drew" wrote
> > > > Now I have to decide if I will tell future gfs about this.
> > >
> > > I think it depends on what you're looking for. For me, I wanted a
> > long-term
> > > (hopefully permanent) relationship, so I decided to tell every woman I
> > went
> > > out with more than 3 dates, or so. My reasoning was I wanted there to
> be
> > no
> > > misunderstandings, and I wanted to feel as secure as possible that she
> > > really wanted me, and everything that did and didn't include.
> >
> >
> > I use mine as a screening tool. I bluntly tell them that I don't want
> > anymore children and I've taken care of my end of the deal by having a
> > tubal. They are notified of this up front and in advance - not after
any
> > dates. I feel the topic of having children is important enough to make
my
> > position very clear. I suggest to any man considering dating a women to
> let
> > her know up front. Why waste someone's time, or put them in an awkward
> > position sometime in the future?
> >
> > Let me tell you a story.. The first man I dated after I split with my
ex
> I
> > dated for over two years. Towards the end of our dating history we had
a
> > date set and an idea for our rings... in other words we were planning on
> > getting married. We planned for me to finish an associates degree (he
had
> a
> > thing about his wife making more than him), us to purchase a home, and
to
> > have a child together. Just one child. After the birth of our child
him
> &
> > I would get snipped. Sounded great... then the man got a hair up his
butt
> > and "changed" his mind. He told me while throwing a fit that he
scheduled
> a
> > snip job for himself. That hurt... the idea that he was going to do
> > something like that when *we* had plans to have a child - really hurt.
I
> > felt deceived. I didn't storm out. I didn't threaten to leave. I just
> > cried, because I was hurt. I was faced with a very nasty decision...
> > continue with our relationship, get married, and never have another
> child...
> > or leave a man that I loved very deeply. We ended up breaking up that
> > night - more his choice than anything, and after he continued to push
> other
> > buttons of mine. In the long run, did he have it done? no - he wanted
to
> > know how I would react - so he told me. We remained friends, but it
took
> > years of us not talking before we could talk without leaving someone
hurt
> > (sadden at the loss of our relationship).
> >
> > So really guys... let them know up front and be honest. I've met guys
> that
> > wanted children that I wouldn't date because I could never give them
what
> > they wanted - to be a father. It is best to just not go there and hurt
> > someone like that. Sure no one should be hurt after three dates... but
> > still.
> >
> >
> > Tracy
> > ~~~~~~~
> > http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
> > "You can't solve problems with the same
> > type of thinking that created them."
> > Albert Einstein
> >
> > *** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
> >
> >
> >
>
>

The DaveŠ
July 3rd 03, 05:49 PM
I probably should clarify a bit. I have always told by the third date, at
the latest. Many times much sooner. Generally, whenever it came up in
conversation. When actively dating and meeting people via the internet
personals, I would always get to know the other person a minimum of three
weeks (and up to six weeks) before I would ever meet them in person. There
were many reasons for that. Anyway, usually this would come up during that
"get to know" process before the first date ever happened. I agree with you
that it should always be up front someplace.

"Tracy" wrote
> "The DaveŠ" wrote in message
> > "Father Drew" wrote
> > > Now I have to decide if I will tell future gfs about this.
> >
> > I think it depends on what you're looking for. For me, I wanted a
> long-term
> > (hopefully permanent) relationship, so I decided to tell every woman I
> went
> > out with more than 3 dates, or so. My reasoning was I wanted there to
be
> no
> > misunderstandings, and I wanted to feel as secure as possible that she
> > really wanted me, and everything that did and didn't include.
>
>
> I use mine as a screening tool. I bluntly tell them that I don't want
> anymore children and I've taken care of my end of the deal by having a
> tubal. They are notified of this up front and in advance - not after any
> dates. I feel the topic of having children is important enough to make my
> position very clear. I suggest to any man considering dating a women to
let
> her know up front. Why waste someone's time, or put them in an awkward
> position sometime in the future?
>
> Let me tell you a story.. The first man I dated after I split with my ex
I
> dated for over two years. Towards the end of our dating history we had a
> date set and an idea for our rings... in other words we were planning on
> getting married. We planned for me to finish an associates degree (he had
a
> thing about his wife making more than him), us to purchase a home, and to
> have a child together. Just one child. After the birth of our child him
&
> I would get snipped. Sounded great... then the man got a hair up his butt
> and "changed" his mind. He told me while throwing a fit that he scheduled
a
> snip job for himself. That hurt... the idea that he was going to do
> something like that when *we* had plans to have a child - really hurt. I
> felt deceived. I didn't storm out. I didn't threaten to leave. I just
> cried, because I was hurt. I was faced with a very nasty decision...
> continue with our relationship, get married, and never have another
child...
> or leave a man that I loved very deeply. We ended up breaking up that
> night - more his choice than anything, and after he continued to push
other
> buttons of mine. In the long run, did he have it done? no - he wanted to
> know how I would react - so he told me. We remained friends, but it took
> years of us not talking before we could talk without leaving someone hurt
> (sadden at the loss of our relationship).
>
> So really guys... let them know up front and be honest. I've met guys
that
> wanted children that I wouldn't date because I could never give them what
> they wanted - to be a father. It is best to just not go there and hurt
> someone like that. Sure no one should be hurt after three dates... but
> still.
>
>
> Tracy
> ~~~~~~~
> http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
> "You can't solve problems with the same
> type of thinking that created them."
> Albert Einstein
>
> *** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***
>
>
>

The DaveŠ
July 3rd 03, 05:49 PM
"Tracy" wrote
> > Depend how you read the statistics. Every time you
> > would have a 1 in 1200 chance. So the 1st time, you
> > have a 1 in 1200 chance, and the 3000th time yiou
> > still have that same 1 in 1200 chance.
>
> That is how I understood it, or better yet - there exists 1
> female in every 1200 that will become pregnant after having
> such a surgery. Thus far I'm not that 1 female. :) I was just
> being silly below and playing along with "The Dave". I'm sure
> "The Dave" understands what 1 in 1200 means... I think some
> people took simple "fun with words" meaning they don't know.
> ;-)

Oh no, you're onto me. lol Yep, I do understand what it really means, but
was being silly at the moment. That is one thing with forums like this, you
don't get a person's facial expressions or voice inflections, so sometimes
it's difficult to know if they're serious or facetous. I was quite amused
that it took such a serious turn. It was kind of fun to watch, actually.

The DaveŠ
July 3rd 03, 07:07 PM
"Tracy" wrote
> Wow - a min. of 3 weeks before meeting them. Most of
> the men that answered my ad wanted to meet right away.
> I never put any time limits on anything, and I'm really an
> impatient person. My current bf is not into emails, or the
> internet!!! :-)

The three week thing just kind of evolved with me, mainly because I'm a
little bit of a "fraidy-cat" (sp?) when it comes to meeting people like
that. The internet works well for me. I had no hard and fast rules, but I
found that I would get to know the other person so much better, that I
almost never had a disasterous first date anymore. When we did finally
meet, we both knew so much about each other we had alot to talk about. Some
might call it a weeding out process, for both her and I. I did have a few
women ask why I took so long to ask them out when I seemed so interested. I
told them all the truth, and all but one were ok with it. A few told me
that many men would pressure them to meet right away, sometimes that very
day. That would never occur to me. I'm just not wired that way.

> So we started talking via phone, which normally I wouldn't
> do until after the first date. I took a chance and I'm glad I
> did. We talked for a couple of weeks before setting up
> our first date. Last night we spent a good hour just talking
> about our future. Ok, we've would have talked longer, but
> his phone died & he couldn't find his other phones. Anyways -
> we've been talking about the big-M and there is so much
> more going on, plus other things... we made a decision last
> night. He is going to take his home off the market, and we're
> going to wait until the kids are either almost done, or done,
> with school next year to decide what we're going to do. We
> understand we're moving way too fast right now, but it is hard
> to remain level headed when your heart is wanting to drag you
> in another direction. It is probably a good thing both of us are
> too damn scared to really tell each other how we feel. Instead
> we just talk around it. LOL Kind of silly, but it is so much
> better than wondering if you'll ever be capable of loving someone
> else again.

I don't think it's silly at all. In fact, it somewhat mirrors my situation.
My gf and I are talking about "that M thing" (lol), but for a few reasons we
can't do it or even move in together for another year. We live 1 hr 15 min
away from each other and her daughter is in her senior year and she promised
she wouldn't uproot her before graduation (which I fully support), plus I
have a very good job in the other direction, just to name a few things.
It's forcing us to slow down and the objective part of me says that's a good
thing. I think we'd move too fast if we didn't have these outside forces
that need to be considered, also. We are both pretty open about how we feel
about each other, but there are some issues we still need to address, such
as financial, dogs, etc. Because of my job and my son in high school, she's
going to move down to my area and we plan to get a house together.

Tracy
July 4th 03, 01:03 AM
"The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
s.com...
> "Tracy" wrote
> > Wow - a min. of 3 weeks before meeting them. Most of
> > the men that answered my ad wanted to meet right away.
> > I never put any time limits on anything, and I'm really an
> > impatient person. My current bf is not into emails, or the
> > internet!!! :-)
>
> The three week thing just kind of evolved with me, mainly because I'm a
> little bit of a "fraidy-cat" (sp?) when it comes to meeting people like
> that. The internet works well for me. I had no hard and fast rules, but
I
> found that I would get to know the other person so much better, that I
> almost never had a disasterous first date anymore. When we did finally
> meet, we both knew so much about each other we had alot to talk about.
Some
> might call it a weeding out process, for both her and I. I did have a few
> women ask why I took so long to ask them out when I seemed so interested.
I
> told them all the truth, and all but one were ok with it. A few told me
> that many men would pressure them to meet right away, sometimes that very
> day. That would never occur to me. I'm just not wired that way.

The strangest man I met told me up front he would have a problem with my
*kids* if he couldn't see me at least three times per week. Needless to say
I only went out with him that one time. Problem solved - he can't be
jealous of the kids if he can't see me at all. :)


> > So we started talking via phone, which normally I wouldn't
> > do until after the first date. I took a chance and I'm glad I
> > did. We talked for a couple of weeks before setting up
> > our first date. Last night we spent a good hour just talking
> > about our future. Ok, we've would have talked longer, but
> > his phone died & he couldn't find his other phones. Anyways -
> > we've been talking about the big-M and there is so much
> > more going on, plus other things... we made a decision last
> > night. He is going to take his home off the market, and we're
> > going to wait until the kids are either almost done, or done,
> > with school next year to decide what we're going to do. We
> > understand we're moving way too fast right now, but it is hard
> > to remain level headed when your heart is wanting to drag you
> > in another direction. It is probably a good thing both of us are
> > too damn scared to really tell each other how we feel. Instead
> > we just talk around it. LOL Kind of silly, but it is so much
> > better than wondering if you'll ever be capable of loving someone
> > else again.
>
> I don't think it's silly at all. In fact, it somewhat mirrors my
situation.
> My gf and I are talking about "that M thing" (lol), but for a few reasons
we
> can't do it or even move in together for another year. We live 1 hr 15
min
> away from each other and her daughter is in her senior year and she
promised
> she wouldn't uproot her before graduation (which I fully support), plus I
> have a very good job in the other direction, just to name a few things.

exactly! My bf and I live exactly 32 miles from each other. It takes me
about 45 minutes to drive home at 4 am, but it I drive there during rush
hour it takes me nearly 1.5 hours. Ironically it doesn't take him much more
time to drive to work from my place taking a major highway, but driving that
rural highway between hour homes during rush hour traffic is the pits. But
we do manage to see each other, and we make sure the time we do spend
together is good quality time. Tomorrow myself and my youngest will be
attending a wedding with him and his daughter. Later tomorrow evening we'll
be at a BBQ and watching fireworks. Then Saturday we're going fishing. I
have to put the worms on the hooks just to get him to go to Church with me.
Yuck!!! LOL

The only location we can live at which would serve both of us in terms of
commuting time is a place that neither one of us really wants to live at.
We really want to be out in the country, but that would require me to make
some radical changes in my life. Leaving my job would be the primary
change. There's no way I could commute 1.5 hours during a good day one-way
just to work for a company which keeps me hanging by a thread in terms of my
future employment with them. Not to mention quality time with my family
would be reduced. So we just need to wait for a while and make sure this is
really what we're wanting.

> It's forcing us to slow down and the objective part of me says that's a
good
> thing. I think we'd move too fast if we didn't have these outside forces
> that need to be considered, also. We are both pretty open about how we
feel
> about each other, but there are some issues we still need to address, such
> as financial, dogs, etc. Because of my job and my son in high school,
she's
> going to move down to my area and we plan to get a house together.

Good... and I do hope everything works out for you and her. It is nice to
see something wonderful happen for a change.

Oh - my bf wants to call his ex-wife and thank her for leaving, because he
now has me.. I told him that it sounds good, but isn't really a good idea.
;-)


Tracy
~~~~~~~
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy/
"You can't solve problems with the same
type of thinking that created them."
Albert Einstein

*** spamguard in place! to email me: tracy at hornschuch dot net ***

Tracy
July 4th 03, 09:05 AM
"The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
s.com...
> "Tracy" wrote
> > I'm sure the male pill is similar to the female version.
> > There is a failure rate. Nothing is 100% guaranteed.
> > Not even sterilization is 100% guaranteed.
>
> That was my thought when I read it, too. Nothing is 100%. You can get
> pretty close, though.
>
> > Mine (tubal ligation) came with a 1 in every 1200 chance
> > of failure.
>
> Does that mean some women should worry when they get near their 1200th
time?
> ;-) (ok, I'm kidding)

no.... ;-) ROFLMAO!!!!

Tracy
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy

Tracy
July 4th 03, 09:07 AM
"The DaveŠ" > wrote in message
s.com...
> "Tracy" wrote
> > wow... you're lucky. When I had my tubel they had to
> > cut through the abs (small cuts), so I was in pain for a
> > while. I'm not looking forward to ever having my abs
> > sliced again...
>
> I've heard that it's actually worse for women. Men are so wimpy in this
> area. Sheesh! ;-)
>
> For me, the worst part was the embarrassment of two nurses "playing
around"
> down there before the doctor came in. They taped *it* out of the way, and
> seemed to take pleasure in literally ripping the tape off afterward.
> Because of the local, I didn't feel a thing.

TMI!!! :)

Tracy
http://www.hornschuch.net/tracy

Davo
August 7th 03, 11:03 PM
We had a court case here in Australia very recently (within the
past month) where a woman who'd had her tubes tied, and then fell
pregnant, sued the doctor and won hundreds of thousands of
dollars to pay for the upkeep of the child.

I guess the down side is that medicos' Professional Indemnity
cover rates have just climbed even higher!

David
Sydney, Oz

observer
August 23rd 03, 05:22 AM
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 21:20:50 -0700, "Father Drew"
> wrote:

>I'm getting mine tomorrow. I wouldn't trust a pill anyway, not on something
>this important. Tomorrow I'm taking the day off to get my nuts chopped.
>Scared to death, but more scared of going though this mess all over again.
>For anyone that has looked into this, it's not a fun thing to go through.
>The doc says it's not so bad, and he got snipped himself, but I don't care,
>anytime you put a knife by the jewels, it can't be considered a happy time.
>They make you shave too, so I'm sure the itching will creep in sometime next
>week.

It's not that bad, I had mine done 20 years ago,
and I didn't have swelling or black and blue. The
doc did a good job. There was very little
discomfort and I wore a tight supporter for a week
or 2 .

A little itching is a lot better than a frigin kid
that gets his ears pierced, and has pink
hair!!!!!!!
Or a daughter that gets knocked up when she's 14
and you find out her boyfriend is buddies with
Mike Tyson.

observer
August 23rd 03, 05:22 AM
On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 21:20:50 -0700, "Father Drew"
> wrote:

>I'm getting mine tomorrow. I wouldn't trust a pill anyway, not on something
>this important. Tomorrow I'm taking the day off to get my nuts chopped.
>Scared to death, but more scared of going though this mess all over again.
>For anyone that has looked into this, it's not a fun thing to go through.
>The doc says it's not so bad, and he got snipped himself, but I don't care,
>anytime you put a knife by the jewels, it can't be considered a happy time.
>They make you shave too, so I'm sure the itching will creep in sometime next
>week.

It's not that bad, I had mine done 20 years ago,
and I didn't have swelling or black and blue. The
doc did a good job. There was very little
discomfort and I wore a tight supporter for a week
or 2 .

A little itching is a lot better than a frigin kid
that gets his ears pierced, and has pink
hair!!!!!!!
Or a daughter that gets knocked up when she's 14
and you find out her boyfriend is buddies with
Mike Tyson.