February Stundie Nominations

LordXenu said:
Contraception is causing a proliferation of men with low sperm counts because it's preventing women from being impregnated by men other than their husband:
Click to expand...

Actually, I don't think that's particularly silly or involves a conspiracy. It's quite logical really. First, men and women do cheat, and surveys suggest that it's actually a lot more than most people like to think. Without birth control, a cheating woman is likely to get pregnant from a highly fertile man rather than a borderline infertile one. However, if she uses birth control when cheating but not with her husband because they're trying to get pregnant, then she's likely to get pregnant by her husband, regardless of what his sperm count is like. So married men with low sperm counts are more likely to have children than they were previously. There are a couple of assumptions, such as assuming that a married woman trying to get pregnant will in fact use birth control when cheating. But that's not exactly a far fetched idea.

In fact, the only real objection I can think of is that there just haven't been enough generations since reliable birth control was easily available. I'd actually be very surprised if we didn't see such an effect, but it shouldn't be visible for centuries at least.

Edit: Actually, there is another possible objection - it depends very much on the ratio of the average cheating woman's sex with someone else relative to her husband. If she has sex with her husband hundreds of times more than with anyone else, then sperm counts are going to be largely irrelevant. She'd need to have sex with other partners at least on the same order of magnitude as with her husband in order for their relative sperm counts to matter.
 
Last edited:
BaaBaa said:
There's a bizarre emphasis on masturbation, of almost Mandrake-ian proportions, in the comments section.
Click to expand...



I like this bit:


Let me tell you the results are impressive. I walked into a hair salon the other day (with a scraggly ass ‘do that was about to get reworked), and the all-female cast of characters that work in the salon were all ogling me and flirting like mad. The rather cute, thin girl who washed my hair practically sat in my lap & rubbed her boobs in my face as she was giving me scalp love. The flirting as I got my hair cut was off the charts. Of course it helps to be have some street cred in the joint as a known player.
Click to expand...


In a thread moaning about the feminization of men, he brags that he knows how much a Real Man he is, based on the reactions of the women at his hair salon.

Irony much?
 
Of course it helps to be have some street cred in the joint as a known player.
Click to expand...

Anybody who actually uses a sentence like that in a serious manner has none and is not.
 
I bet myself that was from Anders. Smithers, I owe me a coke!
 
Cuddles said:
Actually, I don't think that's particularly silly or involves a conspiracy. It's quite logical really. First, men and women do cheat, and surveys suggest that it's actually a lot more than most people like to think. Without birth control, a cheating woman is likely to get pregnant from a highly fertile man rather than a borderline infertile one. However, if she uses birth control when cheating but not with her husband because they're trying to get pregnant, then she's likely to get pregnant by her husband, regardless of what his sperm count is like. So married men with low sperm counts are more likely to have children than they were previously. There are a couple of assumptions, such as assuming that a married woman trying to get pregnant will in fact use birth control when cheating. But that's not exactly a far fetched idea.

In fact, the only real objection I can think of is that there just haven't been enough generations since reliable birth control was easily available. I'd actually be very surprised if we didn't see such an effect, but it shouldn't be visible for centuries at least.

Edit: Actually, there is another possible objection - it depends very much on the ratio of the average cheating woman's sex with someone else relative to her husband. If she has sex with her husband hundreds of times more than with anyone else, then sperm counts are going to be largely irrelevant. She'd need to have sex with other partners at least on the same order of magnitude as with her husband in order for their relative sperm counts to matter.
Click to expand...

Well, there is another countering arguement that I can relate from personal experience.

My first wife insisted on contraceptive methods with me. However she cheated on me (I suspect with several men) and when she had sex with other men she did not use any contraception methods.
She was pregnant with another man's child when we separated.
 
NoahFence said:
So it wasn't in a conspiracy theory thread, but here goes:



So now lack of contact transmits a disease that isn't contagious. Those poor lesbians get cancer just because, according to some people.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8051687&postcount=706
Click to expand...

I suspect that some people make statements like that without thinking them through and are of a psychological bent that requires them to defend their statements even though in truth they know later that its utterly ridiculous.

Others of course, have a occult view of what is going on in the universe that allows that such seemingly ridiculous machinations of the universe do occur.(Same mental bent that supposed that sicknesses were caused by the gods being ticked off or malicious)
 
Horatius said:
I like this bit:





In a thread moaning about the feminization of men, he brags that he knows how much a Real Man he is, based on the reactions of the women at his hair salon.

Irony much?
Click to expand...

Haha, "scalp love." I need to use that sometime.
 
Here is a gem from AE911T from this thread: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=230987
AE911T said:
Obviously the design, detailing, fabrication and erection of WTC 7 took several years from start to finish. It is not obvious how NIST can claim that fires fueled by office furnishings could have compromised this steel structure in a matter of hours and destroyed it in a matter of seconds.
Click to expand...
Because things whose design take years cannot be destroyed in a matter of seconds.
 
jaydeehess said:
Well, there is another countering arguement that I can relate from personal experience.
Click to expand...

Oh sure, there are several assumptions necessary for that argument to actually be correct, and I really don't have any idea whether any of them hold or not. But my point is simply that the argument is not actually particularly stupid. Given a few not especially unreasonable assumptions, contraception could lead to lower sperm counts in a logical manner. Whether it actually will is certainly debatable, and I'm fairly certain it can't have done yet in any case, I just don't think it's an argument deserving of a Stundie.
 
Horatius said:
That was my read as well.


What amazes me is, he also seems to think that stopping using birth control, so as to get pregnant via their low-sperm count cuckold of a husband, apparently makes them stop cheating.....:confused:
Click to expand...

He seems to mean (as Cuddles pointed out) that the birth control only works on the men she's cheating with. However I assumed that the birth control in question was the pill or something else that the man wouldn't know about.

Horatius said:
I like this bit:





In a thread moaning about the feminization of men, he brags that he knows how much a Real Man he is, based on the reactions of the women at his hair salon.

Irony much?
Click to expand...

I bet he also has a supermodel girlfriend in Canada.

Erock said:
http://www.youtube.com/all_comments?v=Tc7FLQR92eg


User hintzofcolorconcepts:
"6 TIMES? Earth has 81 times more mass, so it has 81 times more gravity!"

The epitome of simplistic educashun.:D
Click to expand...

81 times more mass than what?
 
Cuddles said:
Oh sure, there are several assumptions necessary for that argument to actually be correct, and I really don't have any idea whether any of them hold or not. But my point is simply that the argument is not actually particularly stupid. Given a few not especially unreasonable assumptions, contraception could lead to lower sperm counts in a logical manner. Whether it actually will is certainly debatable, and I'm fairly certain it can't have done yet in any case, I just don't think it's an argument deserving of a Stundie.
Click to expand...

That's how I read it too. It didn't seem farfetched (beyond the emasculation bit, I guess).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom