h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

ignore him. he is, by his own admission, a weirdo, and so yo dont want to listen to him.

1) you arent sleeping about if you love your boyfriend
2) you seem to be commited
3) you definately arent playing any fields
4) there is no chance of getting pregnant if you take the obvious precautions
5) he is old fasioned and ignorant

thats fairly conclusive. sorry grandpa

Weird I certainly am! Weird enough to be your, erm, no, that's 'old enough,' isn't it?

Now, let's see:-

1) you arent sleeping about if you love your boyfriend

- Probably not. In fact, NO! I'm certain you aren't!

2) you seem to be commited

- Both of them? For now, probably. I have no idea about them! But are they always going to be? What if a little bundle of joy came along? It certainly split my parents up, and it's done the same to a lot more. And as for my step-father, appearances aren't everything...

3) you definately arent playing any fields

- Definately not, I meant that big diatribe for people who were.

4) there is no chance of getting pregnant if you take the obvious precautions

- Yes there is. The pill is just above 97% and at most 99.9% effective. That's one in a thousand cases. The male contraceptive - the condom - is about 97% effective, when used effectively. In conjunction with prophylactics, the chances of becoming pregnant /does/ become superlatively small, I agree. Assuming maximum effectiveness:-

P(Failure) = (1-.999) * (1-.97) = .001 * .03 = 0.00003 (i.e. there are less than one in every thirty-three thousand cases where responsible usage results in a conception.)

However, many woman are not able to take the pill - often women who smoke or have migranes, hypertension, epilepsy, sickle-cell anaemia or diabetes - or have a history of blood clots or heart disease and some other stuff I can't remember are recommended not to take the pill - seriously, you should ask your doctor about it, it's possibly the best method 'cept celibacy to avoid getting pregnant. It's not available except through your GP, though. And you should definately be using both the pill and condoms, and make sure that he knows how to use the thing. (Perhaps you should get him to practise?)
Sorry, it's turning into a sex-ed lesson, I meant only to demonstrate that it's still possible. I know two of those one-in-a-huge-number couples (though in one case, the boy has buggered off). In the case where the boy absquatulated, the girl aborted. In the other case, they're not what you would call happy families (they're due to break up, for one thing). I'm only looking at accidental pregnancies where they used /both/ the pill and condoms, or I'd count tons more - my own family included. My mother had something of a future until she had me. Now she'll be nearing retirement by the time she gets round to college or a job, if ever. I know, circumstances differ, but it's not fair to risk it.
I'd be lying if I didn't say that 1-in-33,333 isn't considered acceptable risk by most people. I just don't consider it so, especially when you consider that most people do it a lot more than once, and don't always take every precaution. And if you argue with that, you're arguing over the same sort of reasoning that leads many (not all) people to become vegetarians or vegans, or to ride a bicycle instead of driving, or not to smoke.

5) he is old fasioned and ignorant

- 1st assertion: not really. 2nd assertion: definately not! My views here are the same as those held by many people of greater-than-average years, I admit. However, it's not for the same reasons. My objection is with putting the quality of a third person's life on the balance. It's messing with children, and that's /wrong/. If you're using good contraception, it's not so wrong, because you're at least aware of the possible consequences and trying to minimise them, but there's still a risk. Though I'm happy-ish with that - it's better than nothing. Perhaps, though, surgery would be a more permanent and impressive - a vasectomy is the most reliable way of preventing pregnancy. When the risk gets as small as the odds of winning the lottery, I think you can finally say 'yeah, I'm responsible.' But I can't see how anyone can call me closed minded. And I'm almost certainly not ignorant - in fact, I've constantly refined my opinion and have researched extensively. I had to look up some of the figures to check, but I was very careful about the whole thing, and realised the whole time that whatever I said was going to apply equally to my own mother as well as any other parties.

And I'm 18 - even with twelve year-old pregnancies I'm not quite a grandpa!

Now go and clean behind your ears, young whippersnapper!

- Jordan

point proven. ignorant. life is for the living, not for scientists. if we lived and did everyhting safely and responsibly the world would be very boring. a little bundle of joy is unlikely to come along.

2) whose to say that people wont split up even after a commitment. in fact they do. whats a difference of 1 month or 10 years

4) take every precaution and the chances are still very limited. chances arent cumulative: it doesnt get more liekly every time you do have sex, so its 1/33333 or whatever each time. easy odds. i dont get your point about the vegetarianism stuff, so ill ignore it.

5) i notice from your page that your religious. i ahev my own rather strongly formed views on religion and repression, none of which im going to repeat here.

its a human act, and when done with due consideration is not inherently wrong. if you constantly lived your life in the shadow of unlikely things, youd never do anything. why do you cross the road? you could get knocked down.

'...life is for the living, not for scientists.'

A very profound point. One which doesn't, unfortunately, apply very well for those living with Asperger's. When I was 16, my learning support co-ordinator gave me a little booklet which described a number of things that other people would assume I already understood. In fact, some of these things were so obscure, stupid and even alien that I still can't get my head around them. Although I suddenly understood that people had personal space and such ('so /now/ I know what "you're in my space" means when you're not even stopping someone!') I still couldn't get my head round it - it all seemed a little nasty and sinister to me. (I was a bit bitter - for a few months I was like 'hey! People! Where do you get this crap from?') I get it now, but not back then. And it's because I simply cannot understand things without analysing them. Many other people don't. What's more, I've heard the opinion voiced by a few people that maybe it's not /us/ who are the weird ones - maybe we're the few ordinary people in the world! That was the opinion of a very good friend of mine, a mother of five and a wonderful woman. I simply don't get everything like you do, and neither do a lo of other people. I'm not going to say you /don't/ have something I don't have (especially in light of something said later!), but I and millions of others simply cannot understand many things which are not clearly explained, any more than a man with no legs can walk.
So, like, deal with it!

I know that people do split up after a commitment. I'm not for commitment because of the better future it could provide for a child - I myself am /planning/ to become a single parent. I'm just saying that there are different degrees of commitment, from the 'mate-for-life' through the 'mate-purportedly-for-life-then-a-messy-divorce', all the way to the 'mate-and-go'. It's all to do with how much you're looking for in a commitment, really.

I actually got my figures wrong, as I realised on my way over to Tesco's. I was assuming that each provided a probability failure as stated, and that the two could multiply to provide a final estimate. However, this isn't true. In fact, it's far less than 33,333-to-1. For a woman between the ages of 20-25, the chances of conception are around 25%. So, combined, the actual chance of failure /of the prophylactic itself/, aside from natural chances is worked out thus:-

.03 = 1/4 * P(Failure), thus: P(Failure) = .03/.25 = 0.12, and for the pill it's:-

P(Failure) = .001/.25 = .004

So, the overall chance of failure of all three is:-

.004 * .12 * .25 = .00012, or .012%. This means you have a 1/8333 chance of conception. Doesn't make much of a difference, except if you point out that, if our average Jo(ann)e Smoe has sex a total of n times, only with the combination of the pill and a condom, their chances of someone getting pregnant are:-

n = 1: .00012
n = 100: .012
n = 1000: .113
...

Of course this is a bit misleading, since perhaps in the future contraception will be better, and the figures are for women less than 25. However, I doubt that many people have sex less than a hundred times, they won't differ much if you consider women a decade or so older and our poor exepli has a 1.2% chance of causing an unwanted pregnancy. It's not cumulative, but only if you consider each example individually - see next. And I'm not convinced there are many boys who wouldn't consider unprotected sex, given that they are practising it with protection.
About the connection to vegetarians. Many people become vegetarians because they don't want to be part of a chain wherein large amounts of land are used to produce far less food than could be produced from efficient farming methods. This is an example of global morality, and it's taking responsibility on a level on which few people would choose to due to their relative insulation from the results - so not all vegetarians are such entirely because of such reasons, and few base their choice on this alone. So, even if they like meat, why won't they eat a pepperoni pizza? (A vegan friend of mine still misses pizza in particular - she made her choice partly based on this.) It's because, despite the fact it contains very little meat, they are still responsible for it. It's hard to appreciate, but it's true. And so, anyone who is not fully convinced that they want and would be well-placed to care for a child when they are having sex is responsible on the same, tiny level that our good vegetarian is.

Religion isn't coming to bear at /all/ on my views. I have strong views about extracting from the government any form of religious affiliation, and concerning freedom and equality. Many people would like to repress religion, and often do so under the claim that religion is repressing others. This was, in fact, one of the primary motivations of Communism. I can easily reason without the influences of religion and religious teaching (I was originally a Catholic, something so screwy I was drawn to atheism in the end), and people who say otherwise aren't trying hard enough, or are reluctant to give others credit for what they can't do. You haven't yet said anything to that effect, but I'm covering myself in case someone does! Would you discuss your views on another thread?

I'm a great believer in personal freedom, as I said, and with that comes personal responsibility. I am responsible for myself when I cross the road, and for others when I drive a car. (Well, not quite that simple, but you get the picture!) The point is not living 'in the shadow of unlikely things,' it's being responsible for your own actions and their possible effects. If I could have unprotected sex, I would be responsible for any children that resulted for the union. And even if there weren't one, I'd still be responsible.

Let's say I offer you the greatest chance anyone will have of sharing something deeply profound with me, while having a great deal of joy: we discuss our lives, eating chocolate. (It's the best I can do, sorry!) Now, that all seems pretty fine. But if I told you beforehand the chocolate was made by Equadorian slave drivers, who murdered any defectors and used their bones to grind the cocoa beans, you're not really going to be too happy about eating it, are you? We're talking a human life. I'd never stop people from having sex. However, I'd definately want to make sure that both parties were responsible for the 'fruit of their labours, so to speak. It's a human life, and it's a life for whom you're going to take ultimate responsibility. It's not something you want to risk screwing up. I'm preparing ahead to look after my own child(ren?) single-handedly, something which isn't quite what my religion has planned for me - in fact, not much like it. I'm just providing an alternative to the whole thing!

I /knew/ that disagreeing would give me a bad press!

- Jordan the Celebate Chocoholic

Should point out: my religion commands /chastity/ (i.e. sex before marriage, though we are /commanded/ to marry), rather than celibacy (no sex, ever). And if you're looking for what someone /really/ religious might say, look here:-
http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft9911/articles/stanford.html
It seems to me both impractical and not a very sensible proposition.

- Jordan

thats about as eloquent a reply as i could hope for. what i think it boils down to is this: ideologies. for me, the statistics, such as they are (and i am very guilty of under analysing everything - watch as children of 10 beat me at chess ), suggest that the chances of conception are very small, and thus, on a purely mathematical basis, worth taking. you do not. this is an unanswerable question, and onr its pointless to take.

you are belittleing somewhat the human aspect fo sex - i see the positives, and you perhaps see the negatives. im none too knowledgable on asperger's syndrome, but what little i do know of it, plus what i infer from your response, suggests that you have some difficulties in relating to people, and perhaps therein lies your rpoblem: you dont see the emotional aspect of it so much. if im wrong and being horrendously patronising, feel free to be rude about me.

im not one to think unduly about risks, but if you are mature about this sort of descision i have no problem with sex in a relationship...

Eloquent? Shucks, thanks! Don't be fooled, though: nothing I ever say is eloquent - just better formed than usual!

Yes, I suppose it all depends on what you consider to be an 'acceptable risk' - i.e. how important you think any possible child resulting from the union is. I mean, if I drive a car, I have such-and-such a chance of killing someone, so should I drive a car? Most people say yes. I don't know about that one, but I don't think I'm likely to drive anyway! But, on that basis, you reduced several of my paragraphs into one excellent summation: it's all about ideologies. The statistics say yes, the chances are very low if you're responsible. And as for chess, well... let's just say, a chess grandmaster doesn't need to be a good conversationalist!

So if you think it's worth risking, so be it! I don't, but that's - as you put it so well - my ideology. Only, I would think carefully about my values, even if I did feel a compulsion to have sex. And it's a given that you should make certain that this is, beyond anything, what the other partner wants, and that they've given the moral situation a good thinking through.

Am I really belittling the human aspect? I don't have any libido at all to judge it from, so I simply compare it to chocolate - or, at best, eating the world's most divine chocolate dessert (you know, the kind where the mouse is /just so/, and is at the /perfect/ temperature, consistency and is just sweet enough without being too sweet, and... OH!) whilst listening to Rachmaninov and reading 'Paradise Lost'. After weeks of anticipation. Or, failing that, just watching a pizza with my mates and a good movie. I don't see any higher aspect, I'm afraid. And I love a number of people, so I have that. And finally, I know precisely what it's like to really look forward to meeting someone. Just ask Anthea, if she's around. And she's not the only one I've missed. So I just combine all these and say 'this is probably as good as sex gets. Otherwise, it's something I'm not made to feel, because I can reach heights of passion and emotion just by /thinking/ that I can't ever imagine being more.' And if sex is more, it doesn't matter, because as far as I can see, no one can see any more than sex, so we're both experiencing the maximums that we are capable of experiencing.

That was very clumsily put, but I hope it came through OK!

And you got it on the head - it's not so much that we don't see the emotional side as that we simply can't communicate with it so well - unconscious cues aren't parsed, or returned, quite like most. It's not at all patronising - it's a good conclusion, and even if it weren't you didn't /mean/ to be patronising, which is more important!

My point isn't about sex in a mature relationship, it's about sex without adequately preparing for the consequences. If I were to call it mature, I would expect them to be fully ready and prepared to look after a child, should one be forthcoming. The rest is entirely personal and doesn't affect anyone else, so sure, I have no argument about that. Except /then/ you have to ask how important sex is /externally/. Many people value their virginity. If they do so, it's almost impossible for most people to make an informed choice. Perhaps the blinding drives of libido and social pressure are partly why so many people wish they'd waited...

And there we come to the real matter (purportedly) of this conversation: virginity!

- Jordan

hey guys! cut the bitching session!!! or discussion, or whatever you want to call it. You're probably scaring / confusing the poor girl!!! Have we forgotten that sex is fun??? (I haven't, cos I never knew, but I don't wanna go into that)

Hey, she brought it up! And she brought it up with /us/, which is just asking for scariness!

I don't think we're being bitchy, are we? It's just two guys with different opinions! (Now, if it were two /girls/... )

Is sex fun? Discuss!

- Jordan

Erm...can I point out that my first time was great?

And even if I do split up with my boyfriend, I'll nevr regret it. We both respect each other and we both wanted it at the time. So what does it matter?

I'm only talking babies. Bring religion and external morality into it if you must, just remember I didn't bring it up!

I'm not going to change my mind on this one without an excellent reason, one better than several years of careful contemplation can develop. I have every right to hold a different opinion, and to state it!

- Jordan

Fair enough

I hate the way web browsers go ga-ga!

I can't actually write any more tonight. Time to go home, methinks!

Have a nice night, y'all. My dreams nowadays consist of moral dilemmas or logic circuits, so I'm not sure how I'll be...

- Jordan

Hey congrats Sgt Mushy

whod have thought eh?

so there we go, utter bewilderment has two carefully thought out and exisitely expressed arguments set out for her. i await the results of her deliberations with interest

Hey I haven't been on here for ages and have just got back to find this huge debate. Thanks Uncle Heavy (and thanks jordan, although I've read some of it and don't really agree with your opinion!). I'll scrutinise the whole thing and then post my "interesting" decision!!

i cant wait

That really is one hugely confuzzling argument! On one hand there's the social and emotional side and on the other there's Jordan's highly calculative approach. By the way, I do understand Aspergers, my Grandma has it. Most of the time, I consider that if we examined the risks of our actions in a precise and mathematical way, we would end up being *far* too cautious. The figures have made me stop and think, but all the best things in life have a risk factor!

To be quite honest, my worst nightmare is getting pregnant - if my A levels go ok I'll be off to Oxford University next year and have 4 years of joyous university life to look forward to. I'm not opposed to abortion, but my parents would be so angry if I did get pregnant!

It's quite an odd sort of coincidence that my boyfriend was conceived by mistake. He has a sister 3 years older and his parents split up when he was 4. It's really quite astonishing that his existence is so unlikely and he makes the world such a fabulous place!

I've always said that I won't lose my virginity until I'm sure I've found the right person... and now im sure i have. I love him so much that I just really want to take things to the next level.

Despite the risks, I still think I should do it. I'm the kind of person who gets a little uneasy when confronted by statistics as sometimes the smallest of risks appear to be emphasised greatly. When compared with other probabilities, such as those of accidents in everyday life, I don't really think I have any real reason to be paraniod!

Thanks AGB

*hugs*

The only thing I'd say- don't do it when you're both drunk and out of it, or you'll probably not even remember. But don't get too impatient either, just let it happen when it feels right. It always feels better that way And good for you

'always feels better'? lost your virginity often then cat?