Vasectomy is looking more attractive every day :)

The sheer number of unplanned babies among my friends is staggering. And they are not retarded or irresponsible. They were all using birth control... and now they're getting up three times a night to remove feces from another humans ass. This is not something I could live with! I thought it might change when my father had another daughter four years ago... did not... hated her for the first three years. Now she's barely tolearable and lovable for about 1% of the time. Sorry. Never going to say that out loud to any real people but that's how it is.
Babies just look defective to me. The way they have to wobble around just to balance their massively oversized, mongoloid cranium between their shoulders. My girlfriend has one and I'm really trying hard to like the little fuck, but he's such an egocentric asshole... like: I gave it to you, you threw it away, I gave it to you, you threw it away - and now you're crying like the world is going to end because I don't give it to you again? r u srs?
The one thing you have to give to them is that the more you are around them the more you understand about the world. Like: I never understood the babies in the garbage thing. Now I totally get it!

So anyone had a vasectomy yet?

EDIT - Whoops, not you, sorry dude.

Google 'no-scalpel vasectomy'. It's easy-peasy, although I did sit on a bag of frozen peas for an afternoon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Warpe

Google 'no-scalpel vasectomy'. It's easy-peasy, although I did sit on a bag of frozen peas for an afternoon.

---

Puncturing a scrotum with a sharpish thing requiring later vegetal support is never "easy-peasy", you masochist.

I might be able to be talked into it by a hot woman doctor wearing latex and Catwoman ears but otherwise the chances are slim.

I actually just started watching the second season of Californication, and after the first episode was the first time that I seriously contemplated getting this done. I've felt that I don't want to have kids for a long time, but actually getting snipped just never really occurred to me. If I were a woman and the choice whether to get an abortion or not was solely in my hands, things would be diff. But the idea that I could have sex with a girl, who agrees neither of us should be having a baby but then changes her mind, is so very tilting.

The sheer number of unplanned babies among my friends is staggering. And they are not retarded or irresponsible. They were all using birth control...

Umm, I dont know you or your friends but if you had even 3 friends who both were properly using birth control all ended up with kids, I would love to see the stat chances of this...
I know of a catholic couple who convinced their parents they had an immaculate conception, if they can convince parents and family of that, how much easier is it to convince yourself and others that you used a condom that one night when both members were blitzed and horny...

Anyway vasectomy is pretty harmless. I have 2 kids (both planned) and decided to call it a day. As long as you take the recovery advice (no heavy lifting) it is pretty easy. Mine was laser (no scapel).
I know some clinics wont let you do it if you're young and have no kids yet b/c its expensive and not perfect to reverse.

My dad got a vasectomy the week after my mom gave him the wonderful news

He did get he had 9 months of freebies, right?

lol at my mother agreeing to that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vinland

Umm, I dont know you or your friends but if you had even 3 friends who both were properly using birth control all ended up with kids, I would love to see the stat chances of this...

---

It's four... and I don't have that many friends. With one of them I'm pretty sure it was genuine contraception failure. With two they might have done something wrong cos they were 17 at the time. And with the other, I have a sneaking suspicon cos the mothers were a little bit too happy about the situation. I mean it's possible to forget a pill here and there... and then what are you supposed to do when you forget? Who knows!

my ex tricked me into having my daughter.

I was 22 at the time, seeing some girl I thought was a bit of fun. I had plans to move away to uni. She stopped taking the pill. I still went to uni, but spent my weekends being a father...not really what I had planned at uni.

I now have a 10yo daughter - who I love to bits and see every weekend. I wouldn't change it for the world....

But be careful mofos!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oskar

Babies just look defective to me.

My girlfriend has one

---

you getting laid bro?
nh i guess ;)

if the girl got sick and took some otc antibiotics while on "the pill" it makes them both useless and pow she's preggo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by daven

you getting laid bro?
nh i guess ;)

---

She can't read my p p p pokerface?
It's not like it isn't nice to go to the Zoo or Aquarium with him, but if I had to be around him ALL the time, I don't think I could manage that.
For example she just called me 10 min. ago telling me: hey I just wanted to tell you that I'll be late cos my son just shit all over my bed and I have to clean it up.

Do not want.

If you buy Halv a sixer, I'm sure he'll give you a quick snip.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by triumphant cracker

if the girl got sick and took some otc antibiotics while on "the pill" it makes them both useless and pow she's preggo.

---

this was along the lines she used...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vinland

I know of a catholic couple who convinced their parents they had an immaculate conception

---

Wait. WTF??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

My dad got a vasectomy the week after my mom gave him the wonderful news

---

Ha ha, this explains a lot.

Well I guess if you're truly catholic and you believe that a god created the earth in seven days... and let me just stop right there. Then people can make you believe anything.

good news, oskar, you can't make babies by buttsectsing men. no vasectamy necessary!

Ino, rite!

Unfortunately there is a lot of information on how to turn gay men straight but not so much on turning straight guys gay.
I've watched Brokeback Mountain and loved it, so I guess that's a step in the right direcion!

ha, yeah having a little parasite latching onto my life right now would be hell. i've been with my wife for 7 years and married for 1.5 and it's almost every week our parents are asking when we're having kids. first i thought around 25, now i'm thinking around 30. the wife has been on bc since we started dating, and we've never had an opps (praise jesus!), but my friend has. the girl needs to know it's important to take the pill at the same time each day and the pill can stop working with antibiotics, those are the 2 biggest reasons why people get preggo on the pill... i think.

Also getting drunk and throwing up, assuming they take it in the evening

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by surviva316

good news, oskar, you can't make babies by buttsectsing men. no vasectamy necessary!

---

+1!

wear condoms if you don't want a baby, much safer than trusting that a) the girl is actually taking birth control, and b) is taking it properly and consistently. even then doubling up never hurt anybody.

I haven't had sex without a condom in ten years. But condomes apparently have a 3% failure rate when used "perfectly" over the course of a year. It's not the most scientific statistic but it still seems disturbingly high.
From what I've read about 40% of babies in western countries are un-planned. And that's just the people who admit it. And I don't think that that many people were just completely careless about contraception. It's just that no contraception is perfect. In Jurassic Park an all-female population procriated. With that in mind it seems far from unthinkable that even with more than one contraceptive something will slip through.
Life will find it's way.

Yeah, it's definitely still not 100% safe, but wrapping it up is still usually the best option IMO

YouTube - Daughters

I used to hate babies till I had one of my own, as awesome as she is I'm stopping at one. Gonna get snipped myself here soon.

I have a theory that the difference between parental love and other forms of love is that parental is a projection of the self (called vicariousness, but rarely viewed as the foundation of the love)

I believe this explains the apparent paradox of how parents find children generally burdensome and tend to be less happy than the equivalent non-parent adult, yet also can't imagine life without their kids and have inexorably intertwined emotions. They say that you never know love until you have a child, and maybe they're right. But my theory suggests that if you put the same effort into loving yourself as you could for a child, you wouldn't need to project the love onto another in order to experience it

Or maybe it's just not possible to love yourself the way children bring what I'm calling proxy self-love. I'm not convinced of that, though, and since I plan on never having children, I'd like it to not be true

Thoughts?

Mods can move that to whatever thread you want or make a new one if you don't like it here. I put it here because all the talk of youse guys and those bundles of joy made me think of it

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

I have a theory that the difference between parental love and other forms of love is that parental is a projection of the self (called vicariousness, but rarely viewed as the foundation of the love)

I believe this explains the apparent paradox of how parents find children generally burdensome and tend to be less happy than the equivalent non-parent adult, yet also can't imagine life without their kids and have inexorably intertwined emotions. They say that you never know love until you have a child, and maybe they're right. But my theory suggests that if you put the same effort into loving yourself as you could for a child, you wouldn't need to project the love onto another in order to experience it

Or maybe it's just not possible to love yourself the way children bring what I'm calling proxy self-love. I'm not convinced of that, though, and since I plan on never having children, I'd like it to not be true

Thoughts?

---

god damn you overthink everything.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bode

god damn you overthink everything.

---

sounds like the response of someone who is either offended or feels attacked by the proposition, yet is too lazy or incapable of offering up a rebuttal.

It seems to me like children with loving parents would have a massive (MASSIVE) evolutionary advantage compared to those whose parents didn't care. Go from there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wufwugy

I have a theory that the difference between parental love and other forms of love is that parental is a projection of the self (called vicariousness, but rarely viewed as the foundation of the love)

I believe this explains the apparent paradox of how parents find children generally burdensome and tend to be less happy than the equivalent non-parent adult, yet also can't imagine life without their kids and have inexorably intertwined emotions. They say that you never know love until you have a child, and maybe they're right. But my theory suggests that if you put the same effort into loving yourself as you could for a child, you wouldn't need to project the love onto another in order to experience it

Or maybe it's just not possible to love yourself the way children bring what I'm calling proxy self-love. I'm not convinced of that, though, and since I plan on never having children, I'd like it to not be true

Thoughts?

---

My thought is that you might consider reading The Four Loves, by C.S. Lewis... since you think about love so much.

C.S. Lewis is the Ayn Rand for xtians who think they're smart

3% failure per annum on condoms? oh hell no. I've used like thousands without a single failure.

There is no fucking way I'm leaving it to the woman to handle the birth control side of things. I have a hard time trusting anything that can bleed for 5 days straight without dying

obv you shouldn't hit any random bird without a condom, but sex is much better without. You obv need to trust her enough that

a) she ain't trying to get preggo
b) you're not going to get the clap

@ Wuf: I'd guess that childless couples would have very different opinions of what happiness/contentment is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boost

sounds like the response of someone who is either offended or feels attacked by the proposition, yet is too lazy or incapable of offering up a rebuttal.

---

definitely not offended by the post at all, but guilty of being lazy yesterday. sorry i dont have time to type out a 1000 word essay to every forum post like wufwuggums.

it seems through wuf's posts across the forums that he doesn't have the best feelings for the way he was brought up, and i guess that reflects on what he thinks of his parents and their love for him? i dont know, i was brought up in a loving household with what i think was genuine love for me and my siblings. I have an 18 month old son now, and from my perspective wuf's post is generalizing way too much. Unless you have kids i just dont know how to explain it, but I (and i suspect most other parents) know that i would do absolutely anything for my son. And i guess i've never felt the degree of true unconditional love that i have felt for the last 18 months.

wuf's posts is probably true for some % of parents, but from my experience and observations that would be <5%, if that.

and besides that, i just think wuf way over thinks most things.

forgot to add that i definitely don't find being a parent burdensome, and am way happier today that i was 2 or 3 years ago. Again, i think wuf's upbringing is projecting on what he thinks people feel without much if any experience or knowledge of the other side.

A couple points:

1. I think being brought up in a loving and stable household is by far the exception, not the rule.

2. I think you are willfully misinterpreting wuf's post, so as to avoid contemplating that your unconditional love may be anything but selfless. Most parents probably do think that they unconditionally love their children, and most parents probably do. But this is in no way in contrast to wuf's assertion that it is a vicarious love. I would think it would be clear that this is not a conscious distinction in the parents mind. Vicarious and unconditional are not in any way mutually exclusive here.

3. Suppose it was the case that parental love was a vicarious love, and therefore a selfish type of love. Would this make parents bad people? Hardly. It would simply be an interesting facet in the workings of the mind.

4. This part of the discussion is sort of analogous to an atheist proposing that religion has a net negative effect on society. The religious person believes so strongly that their faith is a positive thing that they auto-reject a completely reasonable hypothesis.

5. First hand emotional anecdotes are pretty much useless. What you feel, especially concerning a highly emotional subject, simply has no bearing on what is.

RE: bode

While I don't like a lot about my upbringing, my parents did shower me with love

And what you're saying doesn't negate what I've said. I'm trying to rationalize why parental love is so powerful, and the closest I've gotten is through the vicariousness

I wouldn't know because I'm not a parent, but word is that parents constantly project themselves onto their kids in uncountable ways. I'm thinking that the love parents have for their kids is not unlike love they would have for themselves, if only they could. It's hard, almost impossible, to express unadulterated love for oneself, but perhaps kids are what bring it out

I come to these ideas because of how deep the vicariousness of parenting runs. It's almost as if when most people have kids, their own lives are put on the back burner for their new "proxy-self progeny"


It irks me when I'm told things about how you can't know the deepest love until you have a kid, because I don't want to have kids. So I'm left to try to figure out how true it is and why it may be true because then I can come to a more informed decision. It could be that I realize that they're right and it's not possible to love like you could a child, or maybe the truth is that people just naturally don't do what it takes to love themselves enough that the only time they feel the deep love is with a kid

Or it could be something else entirely. But I do think the self-projection thing is a very important aspect of why there is so much love from parent to child

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by boost

A couple points:

1. I think being brought up in a loving and stable household is by far the exception, not the rule.

---

As long as it gets you safely and sanely into adulthood, it should be good enough. In that respect I'd argue that it is the norm.

Quote:

---

2. I think you are willfully misinterpreting wuf's post, so as to avoid contemplating that your unconditional love may be anything but selfless. Most parents probably do think that they unconditionally love their children, and most parents probably do. But this is in no way in contrast to wuf's assertion that it is a vicarious love. I would think it would be clear that this is not a conscious distinction in the parents mind. Vicarious and unconditional are not in any way mutually exclusive here.

---

There probably is a degree of vicariousness but I'd still argue it's a relatively minor point even with the assumption that a mother's love is completely selfless.

I'm using specifically mother's love here because based on real-world observation I simply feel that on average it is stronger. There are probably many reasons for this including the caregiving nature of women and
not violating the simple psychological principle of cognitive dissonance (If I'm going to be carrying this thing for the better part of a year, it damn well better be worth it!)

But certainly nothing I wrote above *at all* conflicts with what Bode said about his child.

Quote:

---

3. Suppose it was the case that parental love was a vicarious love, and therefore a selfish type of love. Would this make parents bad people? Hardly. It would simply be an interesting facet in the workings of the mind.

---

I agree.

Quote:

---

4. This part of the discussion is sort of analogous to an atheist proposing that religion has a net negative effect on society. The religious person believes so strongly that their faith is a positive thing that they auto-reject a completely reasonable hypothesis.

---

I see little reason to bring religion into the argument from your perspective. It's not as if anyone has claimed that a parent's love is a divine gift or something of the sort. Besides, who has the better vantage point to assess a parent's love for their child- those with kids or those without? I'd argue the former.

Quote:

---

5. First hand emotional anecdotes are pretty much useless. What you feel, especially concerning a highly emotional subject, simply has no bearing on what is.

---

Generally speaking, I think this is usually right. Although I wouldn't say it has 'no' bearing, rather that when you are emotionally invested into a situation you tend to be highly biased and it's very possible that you'd come to a different conclusion if you were a neutral bystander.

---

Also, before it seems like I'm taking sides, I still think it's pretty obvious that this is just a byproduct of natural selection. It's not too terribly unlike why women prefer tall men. It makes very little sense in 2011 why women would so strongly prefer tall men but clearly in our evolutionary history height had both physical and social advantages. So women are naturally hard-wired to like tall men. It is what it is. I'd argue that the effect is much stronger when talking about love for their children. It's just such a huge evolutionary advantage to have parents (and again, especially the mother) who love and care for you, even if it would be virtually impossible to directly and logically explain right now why that should be the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lukie

I see little reason to bring religion into the argument from your perspective. It's not as if anyone has claimed that a parent's love is a divine gift or something of the sort. Besides, who has the better vantage point to assess a parent's love for their child- those with kids or those without? I'd argue the former.

---

I'm pretty sure that I did not bring religion into the argument. I never implied that anyone else was inferring anything about a divine gift. I made an analogy, and I think it is a solid one. The religious person and the parent have clouded judgment when it comes to the matters of religion and parenting, respectively.

I would argue that the parent is the last person who could accurately asses the kind and quantity (if you could quantify it) of their love for their child. Especially when the parent is assessing these things and reporting to another person. The stigma associated with claiming that you don't have unconditional selfless love for your child is sure to button up some lips.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by oskar

So anyone had a vasectomy yet?

---

had one today! was weird to see this thread.

so does your jizz just come out clear?

hi5 drmc!

And yah, pls jack off and report back to us :P
Also: how much less of a man do you feel right now?

Hmm...

Post-vasectomy pain syndrome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"33% of respondents experienced some long-term testicular discomfort"