No. Neither is promising that you'll pull out.
Is this another thread about Iraq?
Every thread is simultaneously about sex and Iraq.
Pulling out is not effective?
Comments 5, 6, and 8, Willy. Try to keep up.
Are you all not totally weirded out by the prospect of having an "orgasm" without your manly Jism shooting copiously from your throbbing member?
I'm a little weirded out by your use of the shift key, Ogged.
I wouldn't expect a guy on beta-blockers to understand, Labs.
Now, now, you'll still shoot copious quantities of sticky fluid, it just won't have sperm in it.
Insert suitable impotence joke here.
You say that only because you know I'll remain calm. Oooh, I'm so mad, my pulse might get above 60.
you'll still shoot copious quantities of sticky fluid, it just won't have sperm in it.
Wait, is that right? Some of the news stories say you'll have a "dry" orgasm.
copious quantities of sticky fluid
I can see we are in need of a neolojism.
I was thinking the same as Ogged in 11.
I can see we are in need of a neolojism.
That's a good one. I should write it down.
Not that I plan to tell any of my offspring, present or future, this, but I actually had success with pulling out as contraception for most of a 6 year relationship. There was always a vague suspicion that either or both of us might be less-than-fertile, but she got knocked up within a couple years (and mere months prior to marriage) while my wife & I succeeded on our first attempt. Apparently, my incompatibility with the GF extended to the cellular level....
Well, the BBC article said it worked by preventing the vas deferens from transporting sperm. I take it that this means it's like a chemical vasectomy, where the series of tubes (uh, vas deferens) from your testes are cut, preventing sperm from joining up with your milky load which is produced in the seminal vesicles. Although usually you can't extract too much detail from mainstream science writing, so this might be wrong.
Basically, we're dealing with EggBeaters here.
No, they're taking the EggBeaters out of the mix.
So there's a chemical that will prevent contractions along the vas deferens but not the contractions involved in ejaculation? I think Big Pharma is just showing off.
On further review, the first-linked picture is an amusing case of one-of-these-things-etc.
24: You mean the skinny-armed one?
You mean the long-hair in the front row?
25, 26: Yes, the one who looks like the others brought him along for a snack.
Pretty sure "the skinny-armed one" refers to the same personage as "the long-hair in the front row".
I don't actually hate you, ogged, but if I did, I would link to this. (nsfw)
"the series of tubes (uh, vas deferens)"
Not like tubes; more like trucks.
(and, yes, that *does* make a vas deferens).
This thread has been making me sad all afternoon because I can think of nothing funny to add to it.
If Ogged is right, then, yes, I would be weirded out. On other hand, less cleanup.
Another benefit: it would make the spit/swallow conundrum moot.
35: this can happen naturally too; too many times in a short period uses it all up.
37: Does your penis grow back eventually?
Are you all not totally weirded out by the prospect of having an "orgasm" without your manly Jism shooting copiously from your throbbing member?
No, it's been awhile since FL taught me tantric sex and this hasn't bugged me at all.
37: You are correct. So this hypothetical pill makes every time feel like the fifth time. There's yer tag line.
There'd still be Manly Sticky Stuff; it just wouldn't have little wriggly things in it. Seminal fluid is produced post vasa deferentia, in the seminal vesicles and the prostate.
Geez, don't any of you boys RTFM?
42: I think there was some ambiguity in the claims at the beginning ... everything else is just rolling with the thread afaics
43: I know that; I just wanted to mock the penised ones for being [even jestingly; we all know people joke about things that make them uncomfortable] concerned lest their Frothing Fountains of Fathertude cease to Spew the Sacred Sperm.
to be clear, it was only Ogged that was worried about that. Which is funny, because he's not getting any.
45: doesn't mean he doesn't like to check that it's all working...
Ogged is probably impotent anyway, from the secret uranium enrichment facility hidden in his pants.
(a) I am shocked, SHOCKED, that men would find an excuse not to handle their own goddamn contraception for a while, and the excuse would be, "No sticky white stuff shooting dramatically all over my partner? No dice!"
(b) People go many years on the pull-out method, but it's kind of a game of chicken if either of you thinks even for a second, "...a baby?"
(c) Am I the only one for whom chicks in jockstraps is jaw-droppingly hot?
50: It's only hot if they're jockstraps. Grr.
It's particularly hot if the chicks in question are hockey-playing Canadian geologists. I'm not sure why.
Because geologists are instrinsically hot, and the hotness is additive.
The saddest thing about me is that I'm in love with skinny butchy lesbians and they want NOTHING to do with me.
53: True dat. Have you seen Rikky and Pete?
54: a common fate, from what I can tell.
56: I was invited to go to a meeting where a guy was taking surveys from bisexual people who are in primary heterosexual relationships and we all came down to the same thing: attractive people of the opposite sex find us adorable, while attractive people of our own sex are just not that into us. How sad.
48a. Must I once more protest the generalization from "ogged" to "men"? Why are women so sloppy in their reasoning?
48c. It's certainly not universal. Ick.
58: I apologize, Michael. I assumed wrongly that there was a consensus. I'd like to believe that lots of men would be delighted to be with their beloved ladies sexually while off BC, when they actually want to have sex, are not ten pounds overweight, and don't act like huge bitches.
"ick" b/c jockstraps are gross, they just are.
60. comity!
61: Comity, yes, but what are you willing to do to get it? What I fear is that men would rather have their ladies on BC than lose a single thing about their own condom-free experience.
Holy hell, has anyone ever watched the opening to ESPN Monday Night Football? It's whore-y even for the NFL.
Side note, similarly OT: Brett Farvrvrvveé is the Highlander.
57: That sounds about right, across genders.
58,62 : They are out there!
but what are you willing to do to get it?
I can make a good meal, and ply you with spirits to inhibit judgement.
63. this isn't the I'm-secretly-gay-for-footballers thread.
61: Comity, yes, but what are you willing to do to get it? What I fear is that men would rather have their ladies on BC than lose a single thing about their own condom-free experience.
61: Comity, yes, but what are you willing to do to get it? What I fear is that men would rather have their ladies on BC than lose a single thing about their own condom-free experience.
Not that my eminently reasonable position (calumniously summarized by AWB) needs defending, but I've always voiced opposition to the pill when one of my steady chickies was considering it (on the grounds of "that shit fucks you up," rather than, say, unnaturalness) and, for the most part, I do believe they haven't been on it (maybe they tried it for a while, or something--it was all so long ago...). It goes without saying that I send all my children Christmas cards every year.
Uhhhh, that's not what I said, which was:
Michael, are you willing to have a BABY to prove it? A BABY?
And that I am seriously Becks style.
69. you just insisted on buttsecks, didn't you?
72: He's even got a closet full of strap ons they can choose from. Thoughful, that.
69 (heh): I'm with you, Ogged, on the pill, which I presume is the world's biggest lie. I fucking hated the pill. One of them put me in the emergency psychiatric ward, and the other just kept me from jerking off for two and a half years. Condoms are crap, too. It seems like science should be ON this mother.
c'est pas important, i'm sure. what's important is that my plan is halfway fulfilled.
actually want to have sex, are not ten pounds overweight, and don't act like huge bitches
The thing about the pill making women gain weight is a myth. I had to do a literature review on this for a trial protocol several years ago, and the same number of women (statistically speaking) lose weight as gain it while on the pill, Also, the same number of women gain weight while not on the pill as when on it. But it makes a convenient scapegoat.
I had to do a literature review on this for a trial protocol several years ago, and the same number of women (statistically speaking) lose weight as gain it while on the pill, Also, the same number of women gain weight while not on the pill as when on it.
That does not necessarily mean that the pill has no weight effect. It could be that women who go on the pill, and are aware of its reputation for causing weight gain, spend more time exercising and/or eat less to counterbalance. Did the studies control for this?
(Also, knowing the number of women who lost/gained weight does not tell you the average magnitude of the loss/gain for each women. There may be larger gains and smaller losses.)
Lord, how I hated the pill. It was lovely to know precisely what I could expect regarding the arrival of my period, and to be able to skip it on demand, too, but it made me puffy, emotionally labile, and migrainic. Fuck that noise. Meanwhile, I know some people love their diaphragms, but I never really could get the hang of them. I cannot deny, however, that condoms are also less than ideal. Alas.
Anyone have experience with those nuvarings or whatever they're called? Same bcp, but lower does because of local admin.
For example, here's a 1980 study on 50 mcg pills, which is a pretty high dose, so would be expected to show a greater weight response than today's lower-estrogen pills, if one exists. "The majority of women showed weight changes less than 1.0 kg; a weight gain in excess of 2 kg was observed in 11.4% and a similar loss in 14.3%."
I'll bet that any weight gain feels huge though, if your tits hurt all the goddamn time.
(I'm picking up a different dosage at the pharmacy this afternoon. Hope it works!)
Oops, forgot the link. Here's another one, published by my former employer:
"We explored this issue by analyzing the daily weights of 128 women during four cycles of triphasic OC use. The mean weight at the end of the fourth cycle of use was the same as baseline weight (average weight change, 0.0 pounds). The largest proportion of women, 52%, remained within 2 pounds (0.9 kg) of their starting weight, and 72% of women had either no weight change or a loss. Over each menstrual cycle, regular but minor weight shifts were observed, with the mean weight rising by one-half pound (0.2 kg) during the first weeks of each cycle and falling by the same amount during the last few days. These results emphasize the lack of association of OC use with weight gain but OC may be blamed at least in part, based on cyclic fluctuations."
We've talked about this before here, but I'm a big fan of the IUD if you can get someone to prescribe them. The copperT I've got does involve heavy crampy periods, but that's the only downside, and my understanding is that the Mirena doesn't even do that. But there's no hassle, and no hormonal effects.
Oh for fuck's sake, people. There are lots of different kinds of pills, and some of them can cause some women to have different side effects, like any other medication. I mean, progestin is the same damn hormone you generate while pregnant, so sure, if a woman is especially sensitive to it, she might gain some weight or whatever. I, personally, find that estrogen gives me migraines.
That said, I fucking *love* the pill (though I liked Norplant better) and while I'd be perfectly happy to have a boyfriend who was willing to take responsibility for b.c., therefore leaving me the option of not taking it, I would personally be a bit put out to have a boyfriend voice actual *opposition* to it on some vague grounds.
Plus I don't trust condoms for birth control.
82 was just pure curiousity, nothing to do with side-effects discussion....
I would personally be a bit put out to have a boyfriend voice actual *opposition* to it on some vague grounds.
Yeah, but you think joint underwear shopping is weird too.
Yeah, I have boundary issues. What's your point?
My last boyfriend, problematic in some ways though he was, had the right attitude in re: the pill. I said I was thinking about going back on, and he was like "ok, cool, if that's what you want. Don't do it on my behalf, though." I was surprised that he didn't express the enthusiasm for condom-free sex that many dudes do. I agree with B that opposition to the pill is annoying. It's my body, damnit. Also, the entitlement that many men feel in monogamous relationships to having condom-free sex, similarly annoying.
I don't get the pill = no condom thing. Isn't the no condom thing dependent on a clean bill of health? (Plus, of course, some other b.c. method.)
But other than that, yes. Yay Leblanc!
93: no doubt. I mean, I understand not likeing condoms, but it's hardly like you can dispense with them just because you have some other b.c. method.
93 -- right. But obviously if you're in a monogamous relationship your bill of health is clean, no?
Also, hey: boundary issues means freedom from guilt trips.
It's worth pointing out, too, that doses are much lower than they were in 1980. The triphasic system I'm on has less than half as much hormone for most of the cycle.
96: Huh? Because the only people who enter monogamous relationships are virgins?*
*Who've also never had anal or oral sex, or been felt up by someone with herpes warts or bleeding hangnails on their fingers, or whatever.
I almost forget that the purpose of bc is to prevent pregnancy, given that with the boyfriend being out of town most of the time, for me it's mostly just to keep my reproductive organs from trying to murder me once a month. If it weren't for that latter effect, I think we'd probably just use condoms, even though they're no fun.
Potrzebie! Sorry -- forgot my irony tags.
99: which reminds me: I've wondered how careful most people actually are in situations without pregnancy risk even when they know better. Anectdotally, I'd have to guess pretty bad, but I don't have anything real to base that on.
"Don't do it on my behalf, though."
Is not something I want to hear. To me, it sounds like "I'm not going to be involved in this important decision on how you stay unpregnant and whether we stay monogamous." But that's probably me and my issues.
103: I read that differently, as in: `don't do this because you think I expect it or want it. If you'd rather we use a different b.c. method, that's fine by me'.
99: They have these things called STD tests, and a couple can get them to assure themselves that both of them have a clean bill of health, and then, you can choose not to use the condoms, and have sex, and not get STDs. Did we miss the monogamy part here?
Indeed, which is why I said "clean bill of health." I was pointing out that the "obviously if you're in a monogamous relationship, you have a clean bill of health" statement is false. Plenty of people who have STDs are also in monogamous relationships.
Gotcha. I think I read in the 'clean bill of health' as an assumption of m. leblanc's and Clownæ's, since that would make sense.
105: no, not missed, it was a more general question.
Even if we assume monogamy, though: how many couples wait until having full spectrum, current STD tests (after all potential infection windows) before engaging in any, say medium risk behaviours? Like oral without a condom or dam, for example?
My question was more about how fear of unwanted pregnancies reinforces condom use for intercourse, but doesn't really for other acts.
to reinforce 108: bitchphd's comment just induced my question, I wasn't commenting on the same situation. It was more a question of how effectively STD education actually sticks.
to reinforce 108: bitchphd's comment just induced my question, I wasn't commenting on the same situation. It was more a question of how effectively STD education actually sticks.
I, personally, ask partners what their STD status is before engaging in anything, period. But I truly think of condoms as being about STDs, not about preventing pregnancy (except maybe as a backup method).
107 -- My 96 was jokey, making light of that assumption.
110: STD education doesn't stick. Which, given the state of most STD education, is probably a plus.
I truly think of condoms as being about STDs
I thought we had already established that condoms were just for signaling wealth.
110: urk. good point. I've just heard some incredibly naive comments about risks from intelligent and otherwise pretty well informed people --- which is what makes me wonder.
I've also had a few disconcerting `wow, you're the only one I've had a good conversation about this with' moments.
condoms were just for signaling wealth
You misspelled "girth".
Speaking of STD education. Is the following claim true: "Most people have oral herpes from a young age, thus two complete virgins (not just technical) in an actually monogamous relationship can still contract an STD from each other via oral-to-genital herpes transmission?" Assuming that is true, how is such transmission?
Somehow a "likely" got dropped from that last sentence.
117: iirc, oral-to-genital transmission probability is pretty low. So multiply that by the probability of finding two complete virgins and you get.... something really really small. Actually, i'm not sure the transmission probability is that relevent.
I've encountered this "condoms are optional" attitude, and it always shocks the hell out of me. "Are you on something?" Yes, I am, but that's irrelevant to issues of disease.
I love the pill. When I'm not taking it my skin goes haywire, I get horrible cramps, and my periods last for seven days out of a 21-day cycle. That's one-third of my life spent on the rag. Blah.
117: Dude, we've all been there, but he (or she) cheated on you. It sucks, but best to accept it.
120: I was more curious about `condoms are optional for oral' etc. sorts of attitudes.
Like oral without a condom or dam, for example?
Does this really qualify as 'medium' rather than 'low but possible' risk? AFAIK, there are no confirmed cases of HIV transmission through oral, and while oral gonorrhea is certainly possible, it's not all that common, is it? I worry about overstatement of STD risks, on analogy with the sort of anti-drug education that tells kids that smoking pot will turn them into crazed reefer-fiends -- isn't it likely to mostly get ignored?
(I'm mostly remembering an incredibly but unintentionally comic pamphlet on HIV-safer-sex for lesbians, which basically said only touch other people through a layer of saran wrap or similar. An activist friend pointed out in response that lesbians aren't immune to HIV, and described a commune of lesbian bakers he knew in Berkeley who were all needle-sharing heroin addicts. Still, I don't think that makes dental dams anything other than overkill.)
I remember learning it as 'low but possible.' And I do think that the impression that I and most of my friends got from health class was that if you have sex ever, you'll contract AIDS and die.
121: Yeah, yeah, funny. This is not of personal directly, neither for a friend nor "a friend."
But you always hear in abstinence only education that absitinence and then marriage is the only sure fire way to avoid an STD. And, first off it's false for the obvious reason that people lie. But also, given oral-to-genital Herpes transmission it isn't even true *in theory*, right? Why does no one say this in response to fearmongering about condom failure?
21-day cycle
?? Wow -- I thought you folks had 12 periods a year.
I've never actually seen a dental dam. Is it as I imagine, like a sort of condom for your tongue, with a broad base that covers your gums and lips?
Most people do. I was unlucky. The really annoying thing is that the cycle would lengthen to 28 days when I had a boyfriend. Like my body's telling me I need a man.
117: You know what I really don't understand about this? If oral herpes can infect the genital area, why are outbreaks in most people restricted to the mouth? I get the occasional cold sore on my mouth (oral herpes) but test negative for genital herpes (I'm pretty sure they did a test when I was pregnant) and have never had a genital outbreak. I'm paranoid about oral sex when I have a cold sore for fear of infecting Buck, but why, given that my bloodstream circulates through both the cold sores on my mouth (on the occasions when I have them) and my genitals, haven't I infected myself, if you see what I mean?
123: There's also syphillis of the throat.
127: Just a square of latex you stretch across the relevant area.
128: I think that's conventional -- having regular sex lengthens and regularizes most women's periods. Annoying, isn't it?
129: I thought there were two different herpes viruses.
120 gets it exactly right. I went off the pill recently to see what would happen, and I learned that nature is pretty stupid and so are my ovaries who apparently have been waiting the past two years plotting their revenge.
133: There are at least seven different herpes viruses that infect humans and many more that only infect other animals.
nature is pretty stupid and so are my ovaries
On the contrary -- sounds like your ovaries are cunning, wily even.
There are two herpes viruses (actually more than that). However, from what I've read although one of them (type 1) tends to be oral and the other (type 2) tends to be genital, either can and does occasionally infect the other place. And I've seen scary numbers in news articles like 30% of new genital herpes cases are oral-to-genital transmission. Though you never know whether to believe such things.
Specifically, herpes simplex 1 gives you mouth and facial sores, while herpes simplex 2 gives you genital sores. I guess if you have both, that would be herpes duplex or something.
129: There are, but I've been told that there's a risk of oral-genital transmission of the oral virus -- oral sex with an active coldsore can transmit oral herpes to the partner's genitals, and they will then have an 'oral-herpes virus' infection on their genitals. Given that my mouth is sharing bodily fluids with my genitals, how come that doesn't transmit the outbreaks from one area of my body to the other?
Huh. I had the occasional cold sore as a kid but haven't had a one for about ten years. I haven't exactly been looking out for my health in that time, either.
And with the housing bubble deflating, it's a bad time to have a duplex.
Or here's another one: does masturbating using your own saliva as lubricant risk oral-to-genital herpes transmission? The possibilities are endless!
140: Much better to use a condo.
Given that my mouth is sharing bodily fluids with my genitals
LB is hella flexible.
123: Last I read it was considered medium/low averaged over all STD's, while low for HIV. I could be wrong though. Your point about overstating risks i taken -- but I've heard at least one physician (epidemiologist, but does unrelated work) complain about oral transmission in youth)
I'm really not trying to take a position over this. I'm more curious if fear of babies motivates some safer sex practices, or are people really coming at it from a prevention of STD point of view.
I know more than one woman who would take the pill while claiming not to, as it made convincing partners that a condom was needed easier.
Given that my mouth is sharing bodily fluids with my genitals
LB is hella flexible.
Or, if apostropher pwns himself using his own post one minute later, does that risk comment-to-comment herpes transmission?
And Apo apparently has a stammer.
using your own saliva as lubricant
Is this a common practice? I can't picture it somehow -- I don't salivate that much.
And Apo apparently has a stammer.
I always suspected there was something going on between those two.
Is this a common practice?
BitchPhD thinks you're a wuss.
Sorry, 152 was me not changing my name back after being unclever.
As a [well known goat molester], I'll refer you people to this site which compares HSV1 (the oral herpesvirus) to HSV2 (the genital herpesvirus).
HSV1 and HSV2 are very similar, and can both infect either the trigeminal (mouth/eyes) or sacral (lower torso/genitals) ganglion, as well as other ganglia. For example, if you get the virus rubbed strongly enough into abrasions, you can have flareups on places like your fingers or back...this is especially associated with wrestlers, having herpes lesions on their torsos. However, the flareups occur more easily on mucous membranes, so they are spread most easily through mouth-mouth or genital-genital contact.
Nobody really knows why one generally causes flareups in the mouth while the other generally causes flareups in the genitals. It seems like HSV1 can just as easily infect the sacral ganglion as it can the trigeminal ganglion, but then it stays latent and hardly ever causes any lesions. HSV2 has trouble infecting the trigeminal ganglion.
Since the majority of Americans have HSV1 in the nerves that lead to the mouth, there's definitely a risk of transmitting it via oral sex, but only if the performer is HSV1-positive and the recipient is HSV1-negative. If you have oral HSV1, you won't get infected by it again in your genitalia, because you have immune memory for it.
And if you have oral HSV-2, which is unlikely, you probably can't transmit it anyway. It just hides in the nerve cells.
Given that my mouth is sharing bodily fluids with my genitals, how come that doesn't transmit the outbreaks from one area of my body to the other?
Because if you get infected in the second area of your body, you'll have an immune response to it that prevents it from sticking around. This is true for any localized, long-term infection (although I can't think of many examples of such things except for HSV and VZV[the chicken-pox/shingles herpesvirus]).
As a [well known goat molester]
Hooray for experts!
I know more than one woman who would take the pill while claiming not to, as it made convincing partners that a condom was needed easier.
It's certainly my perception that people are more anxious about pregnancy than they are about disease.
Ages ago I had a boyfriend who said that asking someone to wear a condom for disease prevention was to insult them, because you're implying that they're "dirty."
In honor of Cryptic Ned's explanation, I offer you a cryptic:
An STD from sick Sherpa after exchanging Alp's peak for Everest's peak (6)
Yay, experts! So, does that mean that if I ever get shingles again, it'll be on the same arm I got it last time, because the rest of my nerves are immune but that one is a seething mass of chickenpox?
160: Nice, although I think it's clearer if you switch Everest and Alp. Do you write whole puzzles of these? Because that would be really cool.
On second thought, that really should have been:
After exchanging Alp's peak for Everest's peak, a native mountain guide with his head under his bottom gives an STD (6)
If I may suggest "a native mountain guide puts his head on his bottom and gives an STD". It sounds lewder, but maintains the clue-structure.
162: Oh yeah. Ooops.
I do have one whole puzzle of cryptics which is part of a small puzzle collection I'm posting online soon. I'd prefer not to just post the link willy-nilly, but I'm more than happy to send you the link when it comes out.
So, does that mean that if I ever get shingles again, it'll be on the same arm I got it last time, because the rest of my nerves are immune but that one is a seething mass of chickenpox?
Yes, usually it recurs in the same place. Unless you have latent VZV in more than one place, and the other place hasn't reactivated yet. But that's unlikely.
Did the location of your shingles fit into one of these dermatomes?
163 -- but how does "gives" fit into the reasoning? My understanding is part of the clue is a wordplay for the answer, part of the clue is a definition -- the word "gives" seems to be outside either of these parts.
There are, but I've been told that there's a risk of oral-genital transmission of the oral virus -- oral sex with an active coldsore can transmit oral herpes to the partner's genitals, and they will then have an 'oral-herpes virus' infection on their genitals.
I'd heard it happened in other people's lives--and then it happened in mine. A genital outbreak of simplex 1 is indeed possible. It's an outbreak of herpes, followed by much worry and Googling and bloodwork and freaking out with one's partner, then resolution with one's self and partner about the new dispensation, and finally a curious call from one's doctor. After that, the STD-free dinner-date and a commitment to grousing about the stigmatization of herpes.
168: It will probably recur less frequently than it would if it was a genital infection of the genital herpesvirus. Also, one is now immune to cold sores in the mouth! (most likely)
164: The "and" is extraneous... Perhaps:
After exchanging Everest's peak for Alp's peak, a native mountain guide with his head on his bottom gives an STD (6)
166: Yep, C5. I still have weird little scars (or did the last time I looked.)
167: There's a certain allowance for words like "gives," "for," and "is" linking the wordplay portion and the straight clue portion. The idea being that "all this wordplay gives the same thing as this straight clue."
Wait...doesn't "exchanging Everest's peak for Alp's peak" mean getting rid of Everest's peak and acquiring Alp's peak? It seems like it should be the other way around.
the stigmata of herpes
You mean you can get them on your wrists and ankles, too?
173: Now i'm just confused. "Exchanging my hand for a laser beam," "exchanging a laser beam for my hand." Hrm, yeah, I think Cryptic Ned might be right.
I don't think herpetic stigmata is very common, but I guess this would be an example.
(abstract should be accessible from a non-academic computer, but maybe it's not.)
If I exchange a toaster for five pounds of bacon, I've now got some bacon. Right? Or is there some sort of special cryptic clue term of art going on here?
Wow, you can get five pounds of bacon for a toaster? I sense an arbitrage coming on...
That was hypothetical, assClown. Just like herpes-induced stigmata.
177: No, no, you're right. We're back to:
After exchanging Everest's peak for Alp's peak, a native mountain guide with his head under his bottom gives an STD (6)
(It also could be "replacing Alp's peak with Everest's peak" depending on which you think makes more sense. Is this a sentence about a mountain climber who is usually in the alps going to Nepal and contracting an STD? Or is it about a poor guide who moves to Europe only to get an STD from sex in a strange position?)
Damnit, got it backwards again. I quit.
165: Cool, and I'd appreciate the link. I'm terrible at these, but I love them.
The trouble with cryptics is there don't seem to be any relatively easy ones to learn on.
I thought you folks had 12 periods a year.
Um, it doesn't work that way, since my ovaries can't read a calendar. I, personally, have a 31+ day cycle when I'm not on the pill, so I probably have 10-11 periods a year, I guess. The pill puts me on a 28 day schedule, ish, and Norplant gave me an even longer cycle, bless its little heart.
And then there are the women who've figured out that on the combo pill, if you skip the placebos, you can avoid having a period altogether; or those who, like my friend who's been on Depo forever, haven't bought tampons in years.
(Hey! I'm so excited by this: Young Sylvia has taken to doing sudokus! It's her first pencil puzzle -- leaving aside connect the dots and word searches -- and she really gets it -- checks her reasoning out with me before filling in a number but she's generally right on.)
my ovaries can't read a calendar
My understanding was that they operated under the influence of Luna.
(Who is most regular in her comings and goings.)
187: I think that's a New Agey fairy tale. Or at least, if it has an effect, it's certainly not determinative, or else all women would cycle at the same time, no?
or else all women would cycle at the same time, no?
Well of course there's the influence of one's rising sign to be taken into account.
And then there are the women who've figured out that on the combo pill, if you skip the placebos, you can avoid having a period altogether; or those who, like my friend who's been on Depo forever, haven't bought tampons in years.
I tried that and didn't have a lot of luck. Began to get bloaty and crampy and spotty and the ovaries began contemplating rioting.
And then there are the women who've figured out that on the combo pill, if you skip the placebos, you can avoid having a period altogether
Semi-serious question: Do women ever semi-starve themselves as a means of avoiding menstruation? I know some calorie-restriction people claim it as a benefit, but do women ever do that just because they hate menstruation so much?
Oh, right. Rising sign, *and* where exactly you live, and what your movements have been for the past month. Divided by twice the water content of your body, and multiplied by the amount of chocolate you eat, squared, plus one third the number of days you've worn heels that month, thereby changing your elevation *ever so slightly*....
All shall be revealed. Behold, lunaception. It's a birth control plan and a fertility treatment!
193: I think I remember Idealist mentioning something like that as an issue (although I don't remember if it was an actual issue, or just something instructors were instructed to worry about) among ROTC students in extended training exercises -- that they'd deliberately dehydrate themselves in the hope of skipping a relevant period. I'm not sure that that would work (severe weight loss would, but not in a useful time-frame, I don't think), so I may have the story all mixed up.
"And, have you read the book, Lunaception? If so, send a copy of your chart ahead of time. In any event, I will reply. If we agree, we will schedule a telephone consultation which lasts an hour and costs $150."
You didn't mention, apo, that one should be sending that chart to a PO box in Berkeley, CA. I'm trying to work my mind around to being proud, really I am.
192: Yeah, I tried it once and hated it too. Diff'rent strokes.
193: *Just* to skip a period? I shouldn't think so. Although, by the by, there was a really interesting essay in the NYT Magazine about anorexia on Sunday; apparently the effects of starvation themselves produce a lot of the psychological symptoms that I, at least, thought were causes, rather than effects of anorexia. Which suggests that it isn't simply a reaction to pop culture, or internal anxiety, or whatever, but that some young women who tend to be thin and/or skip meals periodically (for whatever reason--I do it b/c I'm lazy) might begin spiralling into anorexia by "accident" and develop the psychological disease as a *result* of a random confluence of personality type (i.e., their brains tend towards anxiety/perfectionism anyway) and body type (their metabolisms keep them thin to begin with). And it certainly suggests, in re. our argument about supermodels not too long ago, that naturally thin young women (i.e., models) who begin dieting to lose weight could develop anorexia *as a result of the dieting*, rather than because they've got some deep-rooted psychological issue separate from it.
You have to be very thin or stressed to skip a period; it's not the sort of thing that can happen with three hours at the gym a day.
200: low body fat %, anyway, if not actually `thin'. Happens to a fair number of full time atheletes, as I recall.
Actually, I think it's not especially uncommon for top performance athletes to skip periods.
200 - When the first day of my period happens to coincide with a tournament day (8-10 hours on the field, playing three or four games, no food until after, same thing the next day), my period will sometimes stop and be heavier next month.
Yeah, depends on the sport, but anything where you're expected or likely to get your body fat way down makes it pretty likely.
202 - I am not a top performance athlete.
203: You're on the competitive menstruation circuit? Have I seen you on ESPN2?
I don't know whether 206 is awesome or just gross.
Awesomely gross, grossly awesome.
I knew a woman who didn't get her period until she quit her professional ballet life, at about 21.
Are you all not totally weirded out by the prospect of having a "period" without your womanly Menses flowing freely from your life-giving yoni?
I think I may have to go look at that Hustler cover image some more, just to replace 211 with something more pleasant.
210: Some gymnasts get that too. You have to wonder if that isn't pretty unhealthy --- then again lots of them are already messed up for life.
Actually, I think it's not especially uncommon for top performance athletes to skip periods.
Depends on the sport. You have to get to pretty low body fat levels to halt your periods (though it's pretty easy just to mess with the cycles), and not all sports require that, even if you work out a lot. I managed to compete seriously in college but the damn period didn't budge, and I was floating around 16% body fat at that point.
Not that I was a top athlete, but in answer to Cryptic Ned, it's not the sort of thing that your average lawyer who has painful periods could do just to get some relief.
