this post was submitted on 01 Apr 2025
233 points (99.6% liked)

Futurology

3164 readers
54 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] str82L@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago (31 children)

99% effective is nowhere near 100%, perhaps counterintuitively. Sex twice a week for a year and you're probably in deep shit.

[–] Virkkunen@fedia.io 9 points 4 months ago (20 children)

The only birth control that is 100% effective is not having sex.

[–] astrsk@fedia.io 23 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Abstinence is not birth control.

That’s like saying the only way to build a house that doesn’t fall down is to not build the house.

[–] CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Abstinence is extremely effective. However, it’s impractical and associated with moralists and the piss-poor “sex education” that Americans get.

But it is 100% effective.

And yes, the best way to build a house that will never, ever fall down is to not build one. It is impractical, and beside the point, but it is true!

[–] mosiacmango@lemm.ee 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

The abject lack of sex isn't a way to make sex safer. It's dodging the danger of sex, not addressing it. Abstinence has 0% effectiveness as safe sex, as the lack of sex is not at all related to safe sex.

Playing linguistics games is exactly how abstinence gets pushed in the first place. Agreeing that these games are accurate, when they are wholley not, just reinforces those regressive polices.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (27 replies)