*Penetrative Sex Only when Willing to Raise a Child*

Post Reply New Topic

If there were no stigma/emotional consequences of having a termination, it would be just like getting a boob-job or a a facial peel or a Botox injection and all the girls would want one. If sex had no consequences, slu*ty girls would become even sluttier. Irresponsible people would become even more irresponsible, if abortion was the equivalent of getting a rotten tooth pulled or having fat sucked out of your ass.

Inbreeding. More and more recessive genes being expressed because present in both parents etc.

How long has the pill been around? 40 years or so? If what this study says is true then it should already have had an effect on mating patterns, and on offspring.
.

Personally I see a foetus as a bundle of cells, which if terminated will know absolutely nothing about it. What does concern me is the mental state of the living, Slowmutant if you seriously believe having a termination will ever have the same emotional impact as liposuction you know nothing about the issue.

I get sick and tired of people slamming their ignorant populist judgements around whilst refusing to look deeper into the issue.

ouinon, you seem to have a problem with P-V sex which you are transfering to the wider public, you continue to come up with assumptions with no data to back up your claims. With regard to contraception I have tried to follow up the report you posted but keep coming to dead ends

Which assumptions are those?

Do you have any data to back up your own assumptions that women do not experience anxiety, ( consciously or unconsciously ), in the face of penetrative sex, because of fears of falling pregnant, and needing an abortion or having to face unplanned motherhood, which as the first paper I quoted above refers to as an important factor in partner choice.

It is in fact your assumptions which are in conflict with solidly supported models/theories and data on how the risk of parenthood affects partner choice.


The link works for me. And if you follow the link provided at the bottom of the article you get the University of Liverpool, where you can find, in "Recent Research", their News Release on the study. What "dead end" are you referring to?

.

Last edited by ouinon on 09 Dec 2008, 4:46 am, edited 1 time in total.

No, well, you aren't a woman, and will never have to have an abortion.

I wouldn't expect you to have a problem with it, unless it was on moral grounds. But to suggest that because you, a man, have no problem with abortion means that women don't experience anxiety about the risk of pregnancy involved in p-v penetrative sex is an assumption with no data at all to support it.

I am pro-choice, ( as I said before ), because women will continue to be at risk of unwanted pregnancy for as long as "sex" continues to "mean" ( predominantly ) penile-vaginal penetration to most people. Until "sex" is perceived/recognised as several different activities, and penile-vaginal penetration as only appropriate if are ready to raise a child, women will be under constant/repeated pressure to consent on a regular basis to an activity which presents a risk of parenthood two or three times out of every hundred, and many/most women will think that they have to do it, if they want a sexual relationship with a man.

I do not think that removing the stigma of abortion will do much to reduce the emotional impact of abortion, ( as you suggest ), because although the stigma can make the choice to abort more difficult, causing anxiety and shame before having the abortion, it is not that which causes the longterm psychological damage. I think that you are vastly underestimating the link between body and mind if you think that the removal of a foetus does not have a profound effect on a woman's mental state.

Our bodies are vehicules for reproduction. They exist to replicate the gene. Their whole purpose is to reproduce. And the woman's body is based on housing, sheltering, and feeding this reproduction. Abortion is for the body a terrible failure, it is a violence against its reason for existing. And, consciously or not, most women, ( 9 out of 10), feel this, at some level, in the months and years afterwards. It "hurts". It is only done out of deep need, ( and fear ).

In societies in which early childraising has become a matter for the individual parent/mother, ( rather than the whole community ), to deal with; in which children are almost invisible except when going to and from their daytime ghetto, school; in which having an infant to look after is frequently isolating; in which manoevring a pushchair/pram along the pavement is as much of a problem as being in a wheelchair, ( making entry into many/smaller shops and cafes, etc, difficult ); in which more and more restaurants refuse children, the prospect of parenthood has become far more threatening than it used to be, aswell as less rewarding, because children no longer have much of role in the family economy except as a huge expense.

I suggest that these factors have contributed to a vastly increased "choosiness" on the part of women, and that it is having a serious effect on AS, and other outsiders, chances of establishing longterm sexual relationships/companionships.

If penetrative p-v sex was not expected as a matter of course in sexual relationships then many women might be more inclined to consider relationships where now they avoid them, ( most of the time or completely, and statistics show that this is more and more the case ), and might also take partners with apparently less going for them as potential parents.

.

Last edited by ouinon on 09 Dec 2008, 5:05 am, edited 3 times in total.

You appear to be applying a "victim" status to women in relationships, as if they have no choice physically or culturally but to allow penetrative sex. Is this really so prevalent a mindset amongst women, that they have no choice? Do you have material to back up that claim? I have never known a woman to feel that way, that they are obliged to provide penile intercourse, either those I have had relationships with, nor ones I know, nor even those who I had children with.

In this age of transgender relationships, surely sex long since stopped meaning JUST penis/vagina?

And again: Pregnancy is not so assured an outcome that it generates that much fear in women.

Where did I claim that women are victims, or that they had no choice? They have a choice, between "reasonably" regular penetrative p-v sex, or finding a man who does not want/does not insist on p-v sex unless/until want to raise a child, or no ( hetero-) sexual relationship.


That's a bit like Billy Crystal's character in "When Harry met Sally" saying that no woman ever faked an orgasm with him. Most people don't tell their partners, or friends of the opposite sex, everything.


That is precisely why I have been so careful to say "penile-vaginal penetrative sex" most of the time. To avoid confusion with the other kinds.

If you mean that in most/many relationships it is not the only kind of penetration that goes on then I agree with you, but repeat that penile-vaginal penetration remains the central/principal element of most people's ( heterosexual ) sex lives.


See my previous post about the effects of "perceived risk" of parenthood on "choosiness".
.

I'm reading what you post, and returning to you the impression you are giving. That very statement.. they can choose between f*****g, or choosing someone else.. is simply not representative of relationships. What I was saying is exactly what you just said.... That women have no choice but to engage in "proper sex" or not date most men? Not true.

You imply that the women i know are withholding this information from me? Why not ask one yourself. Lady Macbeth posts here regularly.
You have repeatedly said "sex is considered to be penile/vaginal". Is it so confusing for me to counter that "sex is NOT exclusively considered to be that at all" ?

And again: There is little reason to fear sex, as it very rarely ends in pregnancy. Long back, you stated that x amount of women get pregnant through failed contraception, but you never did explain how that statistic is affected by the amount of sex one has.

Your position seems clear. You think that "sex" should only occur when child-birth is intended or desired. I put it to you that this desire is unrealistic, and founded in mis-application and misreading of statistics, and bad personal experience. It is not representative of most peoples experience of "sex", or sexual activity in general.

I think you need to get laid, ouinon.

That is a choice, and most women will choose to have sexual intercourse with their partner rather than break up, for a while anyway. In a study by Koss et al. ( 1987 ), 23% of college men reported obtaining sex by threatening to end the relationship. And another study, by Russell and Oswald, found that 36% of college men reported engaging in at least one kind of sexually coercive behaviour in a dating relationship.

The Koss study also found that 44% of women in relationships had engaged in unwanted sexual intercourse because they felt overwhelmed by men's continual arguments and pressure. 10% of men reported obtaining sexual intercourse using this strategy.

"Many women share themselves sexually when they feel little interest in doing so, eg: 'I had sex with him just to get him off my back.' "

Many women have sexual intercourse because their partner wants it, not because they do.


I have already agreed with you that what is generally referred to as "sex" is not exclusively penile-vaginally penetrative. However "sex" is still seen as almost necessarily containing, or including, p-v penetration. Sex that does not include penile penetration is widely considered incomplete/inadequate/unfinished. Which is why lesbians were seen until very recently as not engaging in "real sex".


Because it turns out to be not that relevant. It is the perceived risk which matters. in other words, so long as contraception has any failure rate at all there is a risk, which will be perceived as more or less serious, depending on the woman, and her attitude towards unwanted pregnancy and her feelings about abortion.


Please show me where I have misread statistics relating to frequency of abortion, of unwanted pregnancies ( the other part of the story, when women won't have an abortion ), and misapplied them.

If my own experience was all I was going on I would probably have posted this in The Haven, Love and Dating, or in Women Only, but it is in no way unusual.

15-20 % of married/longterm couples have sex less than 10 times a year. 36% of women experience little or no desire for sexual intercourse "quite often, nearly all the time, or all the time". Less than 50 % of 30 year old women in long-term relationships want regular sexual intercourse. Asked about their dating experience women reported 77% unwanted sex.

I found out that this assumption, that penile-vaginal penetration is a necessary part of all "real" sexual activity, is called the "coital imperative". And I think it is responsible for the increasing numbers of people living not only alone but without a sexual partner.

.

Last edited by ouinon on 09 Dec 2008, 10:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

Percentages of Women Experiencing an Unintended Pregnancy During First Year of Typical Contraceptive Use:

I.U.D. 0.8 %
Pill 8 %
Diaphragm 16 %
Condom 21 %

Surgeon-General's Report from HSTAT and the National Library of Medicine.

.

finally we agree on something

I believe that penetrative sex should happen only when the partners want their relationship to be long term.

My suggestion that penile-vaginal penetration be restricted to times when a couple are ready and willing to raise a child has elicited some of the sort of responses that many women receive if/whenever they dare to say that they would rather not have "sex"/sexual intercourse:


Seeing how many women get this kind of response from men if they refuse/resist/are reluctant about sexual intercourse I don't think it is surprising that women are becoming choosier about who they have relationships with, ( because he might just end up being the father of her child ), or even, in increasing numbers, prefer no relationship at all.

The risk of getting pregnant in the first year of typical use of contraception ranges from 0.8% with an IUD, ( which only 2% of women in the USA use, because of the high risk of infections etc ), through 5-8% with the pill, ( depending on which "typical use" figure you refer to ), to 16% - 21% with diaphragm or condom.

I was thinking that perhaps the major factor is the changing role of children and consequently that of parenthood. Having children simply makes less and less sense. Once upon a time children were valued and contributing members of society. Having children was one's insurance for old age, a help with both ( laborious ) household tasks and work in family "businesses", ( farm, shop, cottage crafts, etc), and children were welcomed and useful members of the community.

Parenthood now is almost a luxury item, something which will cost a lot in time, energy and money, and the benefits have become more and more vestigial, sentimental, abstract. Society does not welcome children anymore. They seem, in the West/developed countries at least, to make too much noise, or mess, and are incapable of contributing sensibly or participating usefully in most adult activities. They are ( almost ) seen as a nuisance.

Many women, ( and men too ), are probably afraid of having children, and with good reason. They will remember, consciously or not, how they were a burden, a handicap in most public situations, how their mother having had them then seemed to not want to spend any time with them, and had immense difficulty getting anyone else to look after them aswell.

The still widespread assumption that penile-vaginal penetration should be a regular part of a sexual relationship is lagging behind in the altered scheme of things. P-V sex always presents a risk, of confronting a woman either with the need to have an abortion, ( which results in most cases in depression, etc ), or of becoming a mother, which in our society is an increasingly appalling prospect. But people's conscious attitude to potentially-reproductive sex has not yet caught up with these changes.

NB. A large minority of men, ( though still significantly fewer than the women ), in the Koss study reported unwanted sex too.

.

Men reporting unwanted sex?

Unless these guys were referring to prison rape or being savaged by a Grizzly bear during mating season ...

In a long term relationship, don't both partners do a myriad of things they'd rather not do, but for the relationship as a whole? Like wasting days of our lives with our partners family and friends that we don't like and they don't like us. I've certainly felt 'overwhelmed' by the continual arguments of a partner to do all sorts of things I'd rather not do! Going shopping when we'd rather not. Eating things we'd rather not. Cooking things we'd rather not. Continually having to go places we'd rather not go to, but give in to because of "continual arguments and pressure". etc etc

That 44% figure is open to interpretation. If it means "at least ONCE in a long term relationship, a women had sex when she'd rather not", then I don't see anything other than the normal give and take you'd expect in a commited relationship. As you say at the end, men don't want it *all* the time either!. There is just so many more questions that need to be answered to draw any conclusion. Is it that they don't want sex with their partner but would be quite happy if someone else came along? This is common, too.

If it means 44% are forced into sex because they never want it, then they're in a relationship with the wrong person. It is important that both partners wants are balanced, whatever those wants may actually be. And as you point out, there is a broad spectrum.

Q. How many have gone in to work when they didn't really want to go? It'll be a good deal more that 44%. Does this mean that we're being forced to work against our will? That there's something wrong with our lack of work desire? That we have to compromise sometimes to achieve an overall aim?