



Dude…It’s a hypothetical
Okay, you got me. I don’t need a condom to have hypothetical sex.


Why you want their to be only two genders, mate? You want to be around more men, issit?


If you look at the wikipedia page on defensive gun use, you see that since it’s not centrally tracked and many go unreported
The definition of “defensive use” ranges from “discharged weapon at assailant” to “announced possession of weapon at scary noise”. So much of it relies on taking police reports at face value, no questions asked.
But the real issue IMHO, which is unfortunately not tracked AFAIK, is how many gun crimes are committed with legal guns. IE, legally purchased/owned guns by a non-prohibited gun owner. That IMHO is some data that would really help settle the issue.
I haven’t seen anything to suggest legality of ownership translates to defensiveness of use.
And none of this addresses the central problem of gun ownership - suicide. You are the person most likely to be killed by your own gun.


it’s better than the rest of TX that I can find. I’m open to suggestions.
Texas Tribune is still good, even if they’ve been on the downswing due to budget cuts. Houston Landing might have been good, but it flamed out when they couldn’t find enough advertisers or build a subscription base fast enough. I enjoyed City Cast Houston from time to time, but they’re gone now.
sigh
I forgot Propublica
They’re definitely good.


Because certain parochial schools will split classes by gender, it is now appropriate for public schools to exclude anyone who can’t pass the Paper Bag Test, I guess.


YMMV for a lot of these. The Guardian is notoriously transphobic. The AP and Reuters are a grab bag of real news coverage and naked propaganda pieces. Big City Papers are inevitably mouthpieces of the local reactionary billionaire, leaning heavily on the “If It Bleeds It Leads” rule of thumb.
My own local paper - the Houston Chronicle - is lousy with native advertising and reactionary hot takes.
Not the worst paper in the world, but this town used to have no less than six major periodicals of record. They were all strangled by media consolidation. And the last paper standing is barely more than a coupon book for the real estate industry, with a conservative newsletter spliced in.
I really want a world where we can safely set up characters for moments of failure, evil, etc, without large crowds either feeling offended, feigning offense, or worse, taking it as validation of their bigotry.
It’s a real Heads-I-Win / Tails-You-Lose game, because the White Male Anti-Hero gets the exact opposite treatment. If you make a Sopranos or a Wolf of Wall Street or a Fight Club, the very obviously corrupt and villainous lead character somehow ends up being this celebrity icon for reactionaries.
The same people complaining that John Boyega and Daisy Ridley ruined Star Wars will come out cheering for Adam Driver while claiming Imperialism is cool now.
Anything that makes a story exciting or different - the ups and downs of the story arc, characters with personal flaws or quirks, foreign settings and distinct cultures, non-English languages, non-CisHet romances - become at once implicit indictments of the out groups and charming complements toward the in-groups.
And a lot of that just boils down to the critics themselves. Far-right media amplifying its megaphone year after year, until we’re deaf from their screamed opinions. There’s no right answer for a film maker or story writer when the designated state-sanctioned censors and corporate flaks are all patriarchal white nationalists.
but add “when the condom is not preventing anything”
“Would you wear a seatbelt if you knew you weren’t going to crash?”
I don’t know that. I don’t know the condom isn’t preventing anything. That’s the whole point. It’s a precautionary measure that let’s me enjoy sex without worrying about the consequences.
If your partner is infertile, and you know that both of you have no STIs, neither of you are going to want to use a condom.
Okay but what happens if you’re having sex under the age of 50?
Do you prefer sex with a condom to sex without?
I don’t have a strong opinion either way. I like sex and I like a sense of safety. With new partners, or old partners who fear a risk of pregnancy, condoms guarantee both and that makes me feel good coming and going.
I don’t prefer unprotected sex when it leaves me paranoid the day after. There’s more to the experience than just degrees of friction.


Lots of accounts probing the system for weakness, to be sure. But there’s just not much of an audience to manipulate. And you’ll virtually never find a Lemmy thread indexed in Google results with the high profile of a comparable Reddit thread.


Guy from Langley spending 80 hours a week posting hundreds of SpongeBob memes to convince the Wendy’s PR company flak that we need to invade Greenland for national security reasons.


“We promise not to put turds in your punch bowl.”
“Uh, actually, I prefer to make my own choices. Give me a cup of the Poo-Punch and then I’ll decide if its worth drinking.”
Comic that this is getting so many downvotes. This is a solved problem and the terminally online are just losing their shit over nothing. Anti-condom people are possibly more insufferable than anti-vaccination people.
Neither sex prefers condoms to no condoms.
I can’t speak for everyone in my gender, but I’ve rarely found an issue with them. Desensitizes the man so he lasts longer, comes pre-lubricated so that’s one less thing to worry about, and neatly addresses the post-sex mess. There’s even a little fun foreplay right before the main event, if you’re feeling kinky.
No pair of sexual partners ever utilize them unless they have a good reason to (and even with a good reason, most people don’t, lol).
Especially early in a relationship, they were always bog standard for me. Rarely met a partner who didn’t feel the same way. Admittedly, the AIDS epidemic was in my rear view mirror growing up, so maybe I’m just more paranoid about unprotected sex than the Zoomers.
Vasectomy solves all your problems, dude.